Talk:Straw man: Difference between revisions

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Straw man article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed Article policies Neutral point of view No original research Verifiability

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1, 2Auto-archiving period: 365 days

This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Business Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Business, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of business articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BusinessWikipedia:WikiProject BusinessTemplate:WikiProject BusinessWikiProject Business articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Philosophy: Logic Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia.PhilosophyWikipedia:WikiProject PhilosophyTemplate:WikiProject PhilosophyPhilosophy articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Associated task forces: /  Logic Politics Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Skepticism High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Skepticism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of science, pseudoscience, pseudohistory and skepticism related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SkepticismWikipedia:WikiProject SkepticismTemplate:WikiProject SkepticismSkepticism articles High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Daily pageviews of this article A graph should have been displayed here but graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at pageviews.wmcloud.org

Tip: Anchors are case-sensitive in most browsers. This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist. [[Aunt Sally#Language|Aunt Sally]] The anchor (#Language) is no longer available because it was deleted by a user before. Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. | Reporting errors

The following references may be useful when improving this article in the future: "Steelmanning" and Interpretive Charity reason.org Ever wondered how someone could possibly believe their own words? Canberra Times Now More Than Ever, We Need Steel-Manning Discourse Magazine

I'd like to see more about the steel-manning concept. It strikes me quite close to John Stuart Mills thoughts: [1]. Sjmantyl (talk) 07:58, 5 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed! -Reagle (talk) 16:30, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I notice that no one has claimed to identify the original source of the term "steelman" in this sense. I'd like at least to see that; then ideally reinstate a separate page. The earliest reference I can find is John Salvatier on 2012-06-10, predating the Messinger ref given in the article. Simon Grant (talk) 20:17, 18 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to see examples of it as I do not fully understand what steelmanning is. 98.240.235.151 (talk) 14:42, 9 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There is an effort to add in a new contemporary example of an interview between Jordan Peterson and Cathy Newman. First of all the way it is written does not present a neutral point of view. Other issues with it. One of the sources is to "www.dailytoreador.com" this particular reference is a student newspaper, it is also an opinion piece so there is no editorial oversite, therefore it fails Reliable Source. The source for The Atlantic is also an opinion piece, that never once mentions these attacks as strawman attacks (WP:OR). I do not see that this addition adds anything to the article. --VViking_TalkEdits 15:16, 19 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I have reverted the addition. Undue length, quite apart from the sourcing problems. Philip Cross (talk) 15:37, 19 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The reference to Nixon's Fund speech as an example of a strawman argument should be omitted. The speech described the fund in question and Nixon's interactions with it. The reference to Checkers was obviously meant to be a mixture of humor and sentimentality; not a cogent argument. Ironically, the reference to the speech is more like a strawman argument, distracting from the substantive parts of the speech. 84.247.42.244 (talk) 18:14, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]