- #71
DaveC426913
Gold Member
- 22,774
- 6,451
The fact (or opinion) that it is couched in humour does not negate its validity as an argument. To claim it does would be an ad hominem (dismissing a valid argument based on who is doing the arguing).Hurkyl said:The analogy is being dismissed as comedy, because it is comedy, rather than any sort of serious political commentary. You think otherwise?![]()
It is no accident that Jon Stewart couches biting political discourse in seemingly harmless mockery. Indeed, one of the reasons it is so funny is because of how well it hits the mark.
It seems some people are mixing up cause and effect here.
It is is not that: it is a good argument because it is funny,
it is that: it is funny because it is a good argument.
This entire objection would go away of kyleb simply removes Jon Stewart from the equation and restates the analogy as if it were his own. Then objecters can simply attack kyleb's argument directly.