Do You Know What 'Kafka-trapping' Is?
Well, if you don't know what kafka-trapping is, then as a counter-feminist you REALLY ought to learn the meaning of it. No foolin'!
http://esr.ibiblio.org/?p=2122
And yes. . you WILL read it!
And while we are in that ballpark, you might as well also read The Trial by Franz Kafka, which you can download as a free PDF from the following address. Mind you, everybody and his aunt Sally has read 1984, but The Trial hasn't captured quite the same mindshare, so here's your chance to get ahead of the pack:
http://manybooks.net/titles/kafkafraetext05ktria10.html
To download the book, look for the little red selection menu on the right-hand side of the above-linked page.
"One very notable pathology is a form of argument that, reduced to essence, runs like this: “Your refusal to acknowledge that you are guilty of {sin,racism,sexism, homophobia,oppression…} confirms that you are guilty of {sin,racism,sexism, homophobia,oppression…}.” I’ve been presented with enough instances of this recently that I’ve decided that it needs a name. I call this general style of argument “kafkatrapping”, and the above the Model A kafkatrap. In this essay, I will show that the kafkatrap is a form of argument that is so fallacious and manipulative that those subjected to it are entitled to reject it based entirely on the form of the argument, without reference to whatever particular sin or thoughtcrime is being alleged. I will also attempt to show that kafkatrapping is so self-destructive to the causes that employ it that change activists should root it out of their own speech and thoughts."The complete article from which the above snippet was snipped, can be found HERE:
http://esr.ibiblio.org/?p=2122
And yes. . you WILL read it!
And while we are in that ballpark, you might as well also read The Trial by Franz Kafka, which you can download as a free PDF from the following address. Mind you, everybody and his aunt Sally has read 1984, but The Trial hasn't captured quite the same mindshare, so here's your chance to get ahead of the pack:
http://manybooks.net/titles/kafkafraetext05ktria10.html
To download the book, look for the little red selection menu on the right-hand side of the above-linked page.
posted by Fidelbogen at 5:43 PM
5 Comments:
Makes me think of how Freud said skepticism of psychoanalysis only proved the need for the skeptic to undergo psychoanalysis. A self-serving argument, to say the least, and not rational in the least.
Sane thing with this leftist line of argumentation.
Isn't this ultimately an
"ad hominem" (spelling) attack?
@ScareCrow:
Hmmmmm! I reckon that ultimately, it does indeed boil down to that. . .
In a twisted way.
Learning all the time!
"Do You Know What 'Kafka-trapping' Is?"
What is every leftist argument ever made,Alex?
Notice the (woman,most likely) grendhal (something) making the argument that kafka-trapping is not a reason to discard someone's arguments, most likely because the people grendhal traffics with make nothing BUT "kafka-trapping" arguments.
For instance, the LAUGHABLE assertion that a feature of oppression is denial of said oppression by the person in power.
A little logic can easily dispel this ridiculous fancy.
Ask yourself, if you had all the power, why would you need to deny it? How does that assert or maintain power? For instance, if I had a basket of apples and a gun and you were hungry, and asking for the apples you saw sitting there,but I wanted to keep them all for myself, would I say "What apples?" or would I point the gun at you and say "These are MY apples."? What could you do if I did? Why would I need to deny I had any apples? It makes no sense.
Another example by this person,using feminism to illustrate a point, they speak of a social stigma suffered by a raped woman as an example of a woman being disempowered. Who has seen such a thing? When has a legitimately raped woman been stigmatized for suffering a brutal violent attack. I submit to you that such a thing,I have never seen in my entire life.
I have seen stigma for false rape accusers, which they deserve for harming a man with a violent attack just as brutal as actual rape,possibly leading to his death,or a prison rape of the accused, and harming the case of real rape victims. A true "second rape",not like those who use the term to indicate a just and fair trial for the accused...
These people spout nothing but nonsense,including in their arguments ad hominems such as appeal to emotion,which make a man sound horrible for disagreeing with the factually-incorrect statement. A measure, I believe, deliberately designed,to make people disinclined to disagree.
In other words, those who employ these arguments are emotionally-abusing the listener, and worse, in many places in modern society, it is actually MANDATORY to suffer these abusive arguments.
I am glad this man put a name to this nonsense.It can now be exposed and disregarded,making the employers of these arguments very nervous, if their comments are anything to judge by. They are already feeling around for "exceptions" which would allow them to continue to claim the moral high ground while abusing the intelligence of everyone who listens to them. It is both perverse and obscene.
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home