Example of Rhetoric of Attack

[ajqtrz]

The following three quotes are from another thread. The are in reverse order because I want to use this example to answer the question the player asks in the last one by referring to the earlier responses. I have removed the name of the player, though, of course, you can easily find it if you are inclined. I have done so because I'm not attacking the player, but trying to use a real world example. Hopefully this can be a discussion of the "rhetoric of attack" and not if the "attack and/or defense" was justified or not.

I have no idea why @ found it necessary to turn this into an attack me conversation. I was trying to explain why some top players have left since that was the question asked. It should have never turned into an attack on me and me explaining why I have legitimate answers to the question since I know first hand.

I have read the Beta forum for years. Dig deeper & try again

Why is it so darn hard for you to believe that I just may have more insight into top ranked players and why some have quit than you have? I've been there for years. You have never been there. It shouldn't be hard to grasp that I know more about some of their motivations because of direct knowledge.

[B]Seriously?[/B] So please explain everybody who is holding off on adding expansions, holding off or selling AW & stopping when they hit the chapter threshold where the stats turn against us. It has been discussed over & over how Elvenar turned these aspects that were positive into negatives for battling. [B]Not a chance you are seriously comparing your city to the #1 on Elcy world or mine.[/B] ...
[/QUOTE] {emphasis added}

If you want to see why the person may have felt attacked consider the words used. Beginning with the last entry you open with "Seriously?" The form is an expression of doubt. It also implies that it's possible the person is joking, so incredulous you are to his arguments. This, in effect, is a claim that his arguments are so far outside consideration it must be that he is having some fun at your expense. If he believes, though, that his arguments as a serious response to the topic, you are telling him he's not wise enough to see how foolish are the arguments he's using. And that makes him into a fool. It's an form of indirect personal attack to express disbelief that the person making the argument can actually believe the argument since it's so patently obvious that it is a stupid one.

Second, you then add, "Not a chance you are seriously comparing your city to the #1 on Elcy world or mine." Another form of indirect personal attack, since it undermines the seriousness of the other person. It says, in effect, "your statement is a joke as you have to be aware of that such a comparison is inappropriate, and thus, either you are really a fool, or just playing around." This is an attack on the players motives -- being serious versus joking around.

Third, in the second quote, you say, "Why is it so darn hard for you to believe that I just may have more insight into top ranked players and why some have quit than you have?" Again, this is an indirect questioning of the players ability to "see the obvious." To you it's obvious that he/she should accept your point of view, because you've been in the right place to have gained the insights. And you may be right. Had you just said, "I've been playing a long time and know some of the top players very well. They tell me...." That would be a statement about you and your qualifications. But implying it's "darn hard" for the other person to believe what is obvious to you, again, attacks their ability to see the "obvious." That is another indirect personal attack.

And finally, when you then go on to repeat it with, "It shouldn't be hard to grasp that I know more about some of their motivations because of direct knowledge," you imply that he/she is having a hard time grasping that you "know more about some of their motivations," and thus are a bit short in their abilities to understand things.

So, obviously it's pretty easy to interpret a response as an attack. I've seen it many, many times that such reply's seem to be innocent because for the most part they are reasonable expressions of incredulity. But slipped into the words are some indirect references to their opponents abilities, and those are usually felt to be attacks.

There are two problems in this series. First, the assumption that what is obvious to you should be obvious to everyone, and second, that you, therefore, can simply state the obvious and that's all that needed. Sadly, what is obvious to you is not always obvious to others and may not even be accurate. If you want to make a claim that X is true, you don't make it by saying it's obviously true, and letting it go at that. You have to explain why you think X is true, even if it's obvious to you.

And finally, there is no need to suggest the other player is short of something. If you explain why you think what you think it will either become obvious to the other player that your claim is true, or he/she will counter it with ideas and reasoning that shows that is not, or, more likely, not as universal a truth as you have implied.

Hopefully this little (I know, long) missive will give some insight to how easy it is to slip into indirect personal attacks. When people do this it tends to heat up and sadly, usually derails the conversation.

AJ