Wednesday, September 17, 2014

Fallacies and Biases: Attacking the Source and not the Argument.

My brother loves DnD 4e, and I've not run as much games in 4e as he has. So I'll take his word over it even I have the same impressions as many people who dont see it as good because of it. Unless I really run a lot of games about it I can't really be all that objective about it.
The system I currently use, GURPS 4e, you will hear me bitch and whine about it (in a very constructive way).

Again the bias of who said what. Trying to over come that. Poisoning the Well, Courtiers Reply, and a couple more Fallacies deal with the source vs the argument - which makes then a fallacy. It should be because my friend or brother said so - of course the reason why I take their word over others is the assumption of Good Faith. Still, I believe one can assume good faith even with strangers.

It doesn't mean be gullible BTW, there is still the Burden of Proof and Proper or a Clear Thesis needed. When people over generalize, which is mostly the case (ex. of a bad form is the "begging the questionDid Warrior Women Exist is a classic example of Poor thesis, lack of a clear thesis, Over generalization, shifting goal posts, and, lacking burden of proof and then some lolz*)  You will notice that a Proper Thesis is basically the Steel Man approach to argument, which is cited as the best way to have an exchange of ideas. Asking for a Steel Man Thesis is a very good sign of good faith... and this is where arguments can happen - Give me a Steel man, heck give me your steel army - but remember if we don't agree in definitions this process will end.

And another note, never argue with someone you cannot quote back what they say (especially while you, yourself can be quoted). Funny also is when they can't quote you and they say you implied such but they can't quote you by what you said that made the implication uggg sigh.

And as all my friends did say - its the Internet, never assume Good Faith. Actually in a pragmatic Game Theory kind a way, yes they are right. In any game that allows for Free Riders  then there will always be Free Riders, or there will be those that will Exploit the system deriving maximum utility with no care for repeated participation. (if there are no free riders, then there must be another element in the game not factored correctly)

I try to have the energy to argue because I'm afraid of being too set in my ways to be able to change my mind when reason and evidence are presented to me. This goes for Gaming as well, I have a hard time when I have no counter point perspective of someone else - with different goals, perspective and ideas - to remind me of my own biases. The accommodation style of gaming ideally allows me to differences while being able to bring them all into a narrative everyone can enjoy.

I get it - when you have so many responsibilities and obligations, who has time to argue (only the young). But like in how we fit our obligations with real life duties, we find a way.

No comments: