Re: Chakrabarti backs Gaunt in unlikely alliance

Big Les Wade wrote:
Farmer Giles <giles@xxxxxxxxxx> posted
Now, you may well say that you think their decision is wrong, but in doing so it is necessary to argue the case on its merits alone.

In what sense do you say this is necessary?

In the sense that to do otherwise achieves nothing. If you disagree with something that someone says or does, because you think an alternative view or approach would be more correct, then surely you can argue that more effectively if you just debate the issue on its merits alone. I simply can't see what purpose is served by resorting to personal abuse - and it certainly doesn't say much for the quality of the view held.



Personal abuse against the councillors is not only completely wrong,

Why? Personal abuse is a perfectly legitimate form of discourse. It is widely used by arms of the State, for example by government ministers when describing some of their political opponents, or foreign politicians who they wish to depose and kill,

I accept that in some circumstances it can be a 'legitimate form of discourse', but surely not a legitimate form of 'debate' (applying the accepted definition of discourse as having a much wider range than debate). Furthermore, what constitutes personal abuse is subjective and debateable - I don't think that government ministers would ever get away with calling their political opponents 'Nazis' or 'ignorant pigs'.


and by policemen and
judges when criticising someone convicted of an offence. Why shouldn't the rest of us use it, subject to the usual public order laws?

What the police and judges call convicted criminals is one thing - being, as it clearly must be, post conviction. But we are not talking about someone here who has been convicted of anything - or even committed a crime. It would generally not be acceptable for either of the above to engage in personal abuse when dealing with an innocent member of the public.


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Chakrabarti backs Gaunt in unlikely alliance
    ... more effectively if you just debate the issue on its merits alone. ... Personal abuse is a perfectly legitimate form of discourse. ... that most police officers are drawn to the service by ...
    (uk.legal)
  • Re: Chris X of the BNP - Take 2
    ... debate or argue without resorting to personal abuse. ...
    (uk.politics.misc)
  • Re: Chakrabarti backs Gaunt in unlikely alliance
    ... doing so it is necessary to argue the case on its merits alone. ... more effectively if you just debate the issue on its merits alone. ... What the police and judges call convicted criminals is one thing - ...
    (uk.legal)
  • Dawkins said it right
    ... I had the good fortune to attend a lecture by Richard Dawkins in Sept ... There are always 2 sides to any debate, ... existence of the jello monster and you will have someone debating its ... seriously wants to discuss the big questions seriously argue against ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Liberal white supremacist makes donations to Planned Parenthood
    ... There comes a point in the debate, that it's more effective to argue ... than to argue with Snit. ... "If a million people believe a foolish thing, it is still a foolish thing." ...
    (comp.sys.mac.advocacy)
Loading