Ancap460

I think this is a funny parody, but it's as accurate as saying China is communist.

I had no intent to call you out or anything, and I see what you were saying. I just felt like you were zooming parallel to my arguments and not clashing with them.

A debate I was recently in. "Government is necessary to perform several basic functions." In my opponent's last speech, it felt like most of his arguments were "this is a strawman, moving on" without any analysis as to why.

Yeah, I agree, but do you think just using the word and then moving on without explaining why they are using the fallacy or why the fallacy isn't going to work for this scenario is good? I feel like the fallacy fallacy uniquely applies to strawman and slippery slope in the sense that they are used as buzz words without warrants behind them.

I'm relatively new to the site, but in the few debates I've had, I've noticed people will say something is a strawman and do nothing else on a point. I wanted to throw that out there and see what people who had used the site longer than me (as well as debate better than me) think, as well as I just wanted to give my opinion on it.

My opinion is just that if you think your opponent is using a strawman, I don't think it's strategic or fair to throw it out as a buzzword and move on. I think you need to justify why they're employing a strawman fallacy and then still answer the point if there is some connection, otherwise it seems like ceded offense. Just wanted some other thoughts on it.