The grand delusion

It’s too much fun watching you guys battle it out. So in the interest of maintaining the high level of discourse on this site, read this and do the same. Here’s a sample quote:

>On college campuses, the old leftist intolerance of unwelcome free speech is back with a fury. A guest spokesman for the Minutemen immigration reform group was shouted down at a recent Columbia University lecture. Earlier, Harvard’s liberal president Lawrence Summers was forced out after timidly questioning academic orthodoxy about the role of women in science and engineering.

And so it goes.

7 thoughts on “The grand delusion”

  1. i’m going to say hasty generalization, but i there seems to also be a little ad hominem circumstantial and maybe even composition…or perhaps mr. hanson is poisoning the well in preparation for the onslaught of “liberal” criticisms sure to rise from the upcoming elections, but iguess that goes back to the ad hominem circumstantial

  2. Based on the snippet alone, I agree with the ad hominem and poisoning the well, I would also add the list the liberal use of dysphemisms in his choice of adjectives.

  3. After reading the rest of the article, I decided to try my hand at this game and go for broke.
    here is the rest of my list:
    Fallacy of division, Unrepresentative data – paragraphs 2-5
    Red herring – paragraph 12 (“to compensate…”)
    Slippery slope, domino fallacy – paragraph 13 (“true, react..”)

  4. I believe the responces are hasty generalization and in fact the content of the editorial is quite true.

  5. That’s fine Danny Clark–

    I wonder if you might point out how the responses are “hasty generalization.”

  6. This comment was from Jem–for some reason it got deleted. Apologies to Jem and all.

    Weak analogy: The Minutemen were shouted down and not allowed to finish their holy message by the rabid, bone-club wielding children of the liberal elite. Summers was not shouted down, just criticized and canned after his rather uncouth (and factually unsupported) comments about women.

    And, of course, throughout this piece there is the ever-present liberal ad hominem (abusive), with an implied appeal to fear/threat, and it is liberally peppered with suppressed evidence in the form of doctored quotes.

    Hanson’s overall “argument” is too full of emotive language and simply inaccurate premises to even attempt a full analysis. I almost threw up (but then swallowed it) while reading this article.

  7. Pingback: buy ephedra canada

Comments are closed.