Posted: Oct 08, 2014 2:43 am
Mmmmm, heading the right way, but need some more to them.
Equivocator works for someone who presents such a vague and over-balanced argument to begin with, that there's nothing to really attack about it, but I'm looking for the people reading or listening to an argument, and purposely misinterpreting what's said. Something a little like a small exchange I had a bit back, where I mentioned as an example in another discussion, that technically, we couldn't disprove the existence of Thor. Someone latched on to that, and insisted that by saying we couldn't DISprove Thor, that I was declaring Thor to exist and to be a real god. Now, the exact details of that long ago nonsense aren't important here, just the antic of doing as that person did. Annoying, stupid, and intensely counter-productive, to be sure, whether the discussion at hand is as large as the measure of totality of existence, or as small as where we could go for tea.
Lots of people do this trick, and I'd like to have a specific name for the characteristic, BECAUSE there are so many of them, and because I've found that when a solid and useful label is found for anything, it can act as a psychological handle for anyone to use, to deal with it more easily and usefully.
Obfuscator is nice, but I think that implies someone who purposely makes things hard to understand, rather than twisting things entirely. I expect everyone here has witnessed and been victimized by this kind of person plenty of times.
Oh, and just to be sure, it's not the same as the people who try to catch you with a mistaken choice of words (such as a hyper theist who pounces if you use the word "believe" in a sentence such as "I believe his name was Jackson or thereabouts" ), and then try to force things clumsily that way, nor the people who latch on to some minor error in your presentation, which would qualify as a typo, in order to declare your entire premise false by picayune rule. I think of people like that as third-rate Game Show Host types. They aren't who I'm hoping to skewer with this well targeted word.
'Bandwagon bigot' has some promise for the second. I like the hint of derision in the wagon portion, but it needs something to include the artificiality of the perpetrators highly buffed and polished ego. I'm talking about the sort of person who will cheerfully say that your well-loved mate is a slut or scum, due to their support for some ideal the person has previously decided is only associated with THOSE people, and will genuinely expect to be lauded by their peers for such casually tossed off affronts. I find people I associate the word "bigot" with, to be much less irritating, so I would like to find something that matches the intensity of my distaste for them. Something that implies that they are "a lickspittle unto themselves, who imagine everyone sees them as they do." There is a true sociopathic quality to such people which needs to be implied in the name.
Snob again, doesn't catch enough of the intensive obnoxiousness of these people. Most snobs, will leave you alone as long as you don't intrude on their space. "Snob," to me at least, calls up the image of people who are busy at their own self-diddling, and when you ask a polite question, look at you briefly, and then ignore you. The people I'm referring to, intentionally push their way into a group, and THEN demand that their snobby attitude be taken as the official leadership position. That must be forcibly ejected, and always leave a sordid mess of intellectual fecal matter all over the place, which makes things seem unpleasant even after they are gone.
Equivocator works for someone who presents such a vague and over-balanced argument to begin with, that there's nothing to really attack about it, but I'm looking for the people reading or listening to an argument, and purposely misinterpreting what's said. Something a little like a small exchange I had a bit back, where I mentioned as an example in another discussion, that technically, we couldn't disprove the existence of Thor. Someone latched on to that, and insisted that by saying we couldn't DISprove Thor, that I was declaring Thor to exist and to be a real god. Now, the exact details of that long ago nonsense aren't important here, just the antic of doing as that person did. Annoying, stupid, and intensely counter-productive, to be sure, whether the discussion at hand is as large as the measure of totality of existence, or as small as where we could go for tea.
Lots of people do this trick, and I'd like to have a specific name for the characteristic, BECAUSE there are so many of them, and because I've found that when a solid and useful label is found for anything, it can act as a psychological handle for anyone to use, to deal with it more easily and usefully.
Obfuscator is nice, but I think that implies someone who purposely makes things hard to understand, rather than twisting things entirely. I expect everyone here has witnessed and been victimized by this kind of person plenty of times.
Oh, and just to be sure, it's not the same as the people who try to catch you with a mistaken choice of words (such as a hyper theist who pounces if you use the word "believe" in a sentence such as "I believe his name was Jackson or thereabouts" ), and then try to force things clumsily that way, nor the people who latch on to some minor error in your presentation, which would qualify as a typo, in order to declare your entire premise false by picayune rule. I think of people like that as third-rate Game Show Host types. They aren't who I'm hoping to skewer with this well targeted word.
'Bandwagon bigot' has some promise for the second. I like the hint of derision in the wagon portion, but it needs something to include the artificiality of the perpetrators highly buffed and polished ego. I'm talking about the sort of person who will cheerfully say that your well-loved mate is a slut or scum, due to their support for some ideal the person has previously decided is only associated with THOSE people, and will genuinely expect to be lauded by their peers for such casually tossed off affronts. I find people I associate the word "bigot" with, to be much less irritating, so I would like to find something that matches the intensity of my distaste for them. Something that implies that they are "a lickspittle unto themselves, who imagine everyone sees them as they do." There is a true sociopathic quality to such people which needs to be implied in the name.
Snob again, doesn't catch enough of the intensive obnoxiousness of these people. Most snobs, will leave you alone as long as you don't intrude on their space. "Snob," to me at least, calls up the image of people who are busy at their own self-diddling, and when you ask a polite question, look at you briefly, and then ignore you. The people I'm referring to, intentionally push their way into a group, and THEN demand that their snobby attitude be taken as the official leadership position. That must be forcibly ejected, and always leave a sordid mess of intellectual fecal matter all over the place, which makes things seem unpleasant even after they are gone.