1

Especially if the majority of people do not believe that the terms are inherently vague.

This applies to MOST political claims:

  1. "Drugs are dangerous." -> The definition of dangerous is vague.
  2. "Trafficking in women is non-consensual." -> The definition of consent is arguable
  3. "The porn industry manipulates women." -> The definition of manipulate can be made so wide that any employment is manipulative

What do you think?

Actually most political claims are either vague, wrong, or undisproveable yet used to justify many kinds of oppression. Perhaps, forcing anyone with such claims to bring them to a sceptical forum will help sort many problems out?

2 Answers 2

Reset to default
1

We are trying to avoid debate in favour of objective answers:

Chatty, open-ended questions diminish the usefulness of our site and push other questions off the front page.

—our FAQ

This doesn't mean that all chatty or open ended questions are bad, or unuseful, or do not make the internet better in general. Sometimes they do!

However, that's not this kind of content that fits on a StackExchange site. It is a conscious choice on the part of SEI to exclude this kind of content in favour of a higher signal-to-noise ratio. As such, we are going to close and delete such questions.

1
  • 1
    this doesn't really answer the question. Commented Jun 20, 2012 at 21:10
1

Political claims exist as part of a public discourse.

If you understand the public discourse you can usually find specific claims.

Drug is dangerous -> Definition of dangerous is vague.

If you look at such a claim your first reaction shouldn't be: "That's wrong." or "That's right." Your first reaction should be "What do they actually mean?". If you are debating in person you can ask the other person:

"What danger are you concerned about?"

If you do you will get answers like: "Drug users commit more crimes than people who don't take drugs", "Drug users often lose their jobs because of the drugs" and "Drug users get health problems".

Perhaps, forcing anyone with such claims to bring them to sceptic forum will help sort many problems out.

You can't force somebody who doesn't care for this website to come here to defend his claims. This website doesn't have any subpoena powers. We can't prevent people who don't visit this website from being vague. On the other hand we can forbid being vague on this website.

2
  • 2
    "This post still needs 2 vote(s) from other users to subpoena this person for further questioning in front of a judge." - oh, a man can dream, can't he? Commented Jun 22, 2012 at 4:13
  • actually how does this answer question? So asking is drug dangerous okay or not? I know the question is vague because the term danger is vague. Also I agree with you that it leads to what do they actually mean. Commented Jun 23, 2012 at 15:23

You must log in to answer this question.