How People Argue "Eristically"

In philosophy and rhetoric, eristic (from Eris, the ancient Greek goddess of chaos, strife, and discord) refers to argument that aims to successfully dispute another's argument, rather than searching for truth. - Wikipedia

You know you're in an eristic or bad faith discussion with someone when he or she does the following ...

Your opponent refuses to engage the most important points you're making.
Your opponent focuses on issues that are minor or tangential to your main argument.
Your opponent demands evidence to support your tangential points, while providing only opinion and no evidence to support his own claims.
Your opponent directly or indirectly attacks your motivations, thus moving the discussion away from the issue to your character.
Invariably, if you're arguing with an eristic "Devout Catholic", you'll be told (in so many words) to go to confession for defending your position with any zeal, fortitude or persistence; or, in lieu of that, you'll be referred to a Scripture verse that implies that you are lacking in charity for standing up for the truth.
Your opponent will completely ignore tone, context and the obvious connection between ideas in anything you say.

It is futile to argue with such a person. Your opponent is not interested in discovering the truth. To engage such a person is not only frustrating and a waste of time, it is a sin. It is casting "pearls before swine" (Mat. 7:6)

Comments

The Full Story on Bishop Finn

" Let's step outside and settle this thing like men ," she said, and she was a lady. " You're spewing anti-Catholic rhetoric !" he insisted. "How can you criticize a bishop when you're an actor and everyone knows actors are perverts and nitwits ," she screamed. (That last gal had a point). These are all reactions to my post last week about Rod Dreher's article on Bishop Finn's Indictment. And above all, people are charging me with believing the biased media coverage of the scandal. This, at least, is not true. In fact, everything I say in this post will be taken not from a media account of the scandal , but from the independent report on it as commissioned by the diocese , the Graves Report, which you can read on your own here . So let's shove the media aside and see for ourselves what's contained in this internal diocesan report conducted by an independent firm. *** Fr. Shawn Ratigan was a priest of the diocese of Kansas Cit...

What Follows ...

At one point I took all of these posts down, because I felt I had been far too willingly brainwashed into a religious system that was doing more harm than good. But, lately, I decided to republish some of the more interesting posts. What follows is about ten percent of what I posted from 2007 to 2021. They are in an odd chronological order, becuase Blogger is a clunky. Meanwhile, you can find my more sane (and more recent) musings here - https://theateroftheword.substack.com .

Charlie Johnston's Followers take the Next Wrong Step

NOTE - On April 29, 2106, Charlie Johnston responded to this post and my previous one with outright lies, doing his best to libel me in the process. I go into detail about that here - Charlie Johnston Lies about Me - and I Admire Him for It! Charlie is one of the most outrageous frauds in the Catholic Church. He actually fascinates me - in a sad way. Read on ... Charlie Johnston is a false prophet. His archbishop has "strongly" advised Catholics to be cautious of him. His archbishop has also banned him from speaking in his own archdiocese. Charlie, in the great tradition of false prophets, has spun this warning to his own advantage , and Charlie's True Believers have rallied around him and have been guzzling the Kool-Aid since the bishop's letter and Charlie's spin appeared earlier this week. I posted about Charlie Johnston last fall , detailing at least one of his prophecies that have proven false, and detailing, from evidence on his Faceb...

Waiting for Godot to Leave

Search This Blog