| Revision as of 16:06, 26 November 2017 edit83d40m (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers12,267 edits added a link to Propaganda techniques, where it is listed among the techniques discussed← Previous edit | Revision as of 16:41, 27 December 2017 edit undoParadoctor (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers34,104 edits removed per WP:CHALLENGE, while fallacious arguments are likely to be part of it, the technique in itself is not fallacious; removed ref as WP:SELFPUBLISHED; +{{Propaganda}}; some MOSNext edit → | ||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| '''Gish gallop''' is a term for a technique used during ] that focuses on overwhelming one's opponent with as many arguments as possible, without regard for accuracy or strength of the arguments. |
'''Gish gallop''' is a term for a technique used during ] that focuses on overwhelming one's opponent with as many arguments as possible, without regard for accuracy or strength of the arguments. | ||
| The term was coined by ] and named after the ] ], who used the technique frequently against science-based opponents on the topic of evolution.<ref name="scott2004">{{harvnb|Scott|2004|p=23}}</ref><ref name="scott1994">{{harvnb|Scott|1994}}</ref> The phrase has become a pejorative used to describe similar debate styles employed by proponents of other, usually fringe beliefs, such as ] or the ].<ref name="Short and spiky">{{cite web|title=Homeopathy: Recedit ad anum|url=http://blog.anarchic-teapot.net/2012/02/18/homeopathy-recedit-ad-anum/|publisher=Short and spiky|accessdate=21 May 2012|date=15 Feb 2012}}</ref><ref name="Skeptical Review">{{cite web|last=St. Whitehall|first=Nigel|title=Skeptoid #167|url=http://www.skepreview.com/2009/08/skeptoid-167.html|publisher=The Skeptical Review|accessdate=21 May 2012|date=18 Aug 2009}}</ref> | The term was coined by ] and named after the ] ], who used the technique frequently against science-based opponents on the topic of evolution.<ref name="scott2004">{{harvnb|Scott|2004|p=23}}</ref><ref name="scott1994">{{harvnb|Scott|1994}}</ref> The phrase has become a pejorative used to describe similar debate styles employed by proponents of other, usually fringe beliefs, such as ] or the ].<ref name="Short and spiky">{{cite web|title=Homeopathy: Recedit ad anum|url=http://blog.anarchic-teapot.net/2012/02/18/homeopathy-recedit-ad-anum/|publisher=Short and spiky|accessdate=21 May 2012|date=15 Feb 2012}}</ref><ref name="Skeptical Review">{{cite web|last=St. Whitehall|first=Nigel|title=Skeptoid #167|url=http://www.skepreview.com/2009/08/skeptoid-167.html|publisher=The Skeptical Review|accessdate=21 May 2012|date=18 Aug 2009}}</ref> | ||
| Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
| Generally, it is more difficult to use the Gish gallop in a structured debate than in a free-form one.<ref name="johnson">{{harvnb|Johnson|2017|p=14-15}}</ref> If a debater is familiar with an opponent who is known to use the Gish gallop, the technique may be countered somewhat during a debate, by preempting and refuting the opponent's commonly-used arguments before the opponent has an opportunity to launch into a Gish gallop.<ref name="grant2015">{{harvnb|Grant|2015|p=55}}</ref> | Generally, it is more difficult to use the Gish gallop in a structured debate than in a free-form one.<ref name="johnson">{{harvnb|Johnson|2017|p=14-15}}</ref> If a debater is familiar with an opponent who is known to use the Gish gallop, the technique may be countered somewhat during a debate, by preempting and refuting the opponent's commonly-used arguments before the opponent has an opportunity to launch into a Gish gallop.<ref name="grant2015">{{harvnb|Grant|2015|p=55}}</ref> | ||
| ==See also== | == See also == | ||
| *] | * ] | ||
| *] | * ] | ||
| * ] | |||
| *] | |||
| ==Notes== | == Notes == | ||
| {{reflist}} | {{reflist}} | ||
| == |
== References == | ||
| *{{cite book|first=John|last=Grant|title=Denying Science: Conspiracy Theories, Media Distortions, and the War Against Reality|year=2011|publisher=Prometheus Books|ISBN=9781616144005}} | *{{cite book|first=John|last=Grant|title=Denying Science: Conspiracy Theories, Media Distortions, and the War Against Reality|year=2011|publisher=Prometheus Books|ISBN=9781616144005}} | ||
| *{{cite book|first=John|last=Grant|title=Debunk it: How to Stay Sane in a World of Misinformation|publisher=Zest Books|year=2015|ISBN=978-1-936976-68-3|place=San Francisco}} | *{{cite book|first=John|last=Grant|title=Debunk it: How to Stay Sane in a World of Misinformation|publisher=Zest Books|year=2015|ISBN=978-1-936976-68-3|place=San Francisco}} | ||
| *{{cite book|first=C.J.S.|last=Hayward|title=The Seraphinians: '"Blessed Seraphim Rose" and His Axe-Wielding Western Converts|publisher=Zest Books|year=2015|series=The Collected Works of C.J.S. Hayward|place=San Francisco}} | *{{cite book|first=C.J.S.|last=Hayward|title=The Seraphinians: '"Blessed Seraphim Rose" and His Axe-Wielding Western Converts|publisher=Zest Books|year=2015|series=The Collected Works of C.J.S. Hayward|place=San Francisco}} | ||
| *{{cite web|series=Perspectives on Harmful Speech Online|editor-last=Gasser|editor-first=Urs|publisher=]|last=Johnson|first=Amy|title=The Multiple Harms of Sea Lions|page=14|url=https://cyber.harvard.edu/sites/cyber.harvard.edu/files/2017-08_harmfulspeech.pdf|year=2017}} | *{{cite web|series=Perspectives on Harmful Speech Online|editor-last=Gasser|editor-first=Urs|publisher=]|last=Johnson|first=Amy|title=The Multiple Harms of Sea Lions|page=14|url=https://cyber.harvard.edu/sites/cyber.harvard.edu/files/2017-08_harmfulspeech.pdf|year=2017}} | ||
| *{{cite book|last=Marcovici|first=Michael|title=Lesson Learned?: Nuclear Energy after Fukushima|year=2013|publisher=Books on Demand|ISBN=3732202747}} | |||
| {{Propaganda}} | |||
| *{{cite book|last=Scott|first=Eugenie|url=https://ncse.com/book/export/html/1914|title=Confronting Creationism|series=Reports of National Center for Science Education|volume=24/6|year=2004|authorlink=Eugenie Scott}} | *{{cite book|last=Scott|first=Eugenie|url=https://ncse.com/book/export/html/1914|title=Confronting Creationism|series=Reports of National Center for Science Education|volume=24/6|year=2004|authorlink=Eugenie Scott}} | ||
| *{{cite web|url=http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/debating/globetrotters.html|title=Debates and the Globetrotters|last=Scott |first=Eugenie|year=1994|publisher=]|accessdate=2017-10-06|authorlink=Eugenie Scott}} | *{{cite web|url=http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/debating/globetrotters.html|title=Debates and the Globetrotters|last=Scott |first=Eugenie|year=1994|publisher=]|accessdate=2017-10-06|authorlink=Eugenie Scott}} | ||
Revision as of 16:41, 27 December 2017
Gish gallop is a term for a technique used during debating that focuses on overwhelming one's opponent with as many arguments as possible, without regard for accuracy or strength of the arguments.
The term was coined by Eugenie C. Scott and named after the creationist Duane T. Gish, who used the technique frequently against science-based opponents on the topic of evolution. The phrase has become a pejorative used to describe similar debate styles employed by proponents of other, usually fringe beliefs, such as homeopathy or the moon landing conspiracy theories.
Technique and counter measures
During a Gish gallop, a debater confronts an opponent with a rapid series of many specious arguments, half-truths, and misrepresentations in a short space of time, which makes it impossible for the opponent to refute all of them within the format of a formal debate. In practice, each point raised by the "Gish galloper" takes considerably more time to refute or fact-check than it did to state in the first place. The technique wastes an opponent's time and may cast doubt on the opponent's debating ability for an audience unfamiliar with the technique, especially, if no independent fact-checking is involved, or, if the audience has limited knowledge of the topics.
Generally, it is more difficult to use the Gish gallop in a structured debate than in a free-form one. If a debater is familiar with an opponent who is known to use the Gish gallop, the technique may be countered somewhat during a debate, by preempting and refuting the opponent's commonly-used arguments before the opponent has an opportunity to launch into a Gish gallop.
See also
Notes
- Scott 2004, p. 23
- Scott 1994
- "Homeopathy: Recedit ad anum". Short and spiky. 15 Feb 2012. Retrieved 21 May 2012.
- St. Whitehall, Nigel (18 Aug 2009). "Skeptoid #167". The Skeptical Review. Retrieved 21 May 2012.
- Hayward 2015, p. 67
- Grant 2011, p. 74
- Johnson 2017, p. 14-15
- Grant 2015, p. 55
References
- Grant, John (2011). Denying Science: Conspiracy Theories, Media Distortions, and the War Against Reality. Prometheus Books. ISBN 9781616144005.
- Grant, John (2015). Debunk it: How to Stay Sane in a World of Misinformation. San Francisco: Zest Books. ISBN 978-1-936976-68-3.
- Hayward, C.J.S. (2015). The Seraphinians: '"Blessed Seraphim Rose" and His Axe-Wielding Western Converts. The Collected Works of C.J.S. Hayward. San Francisco: Zest Books.
- Johnson, Amy (2017). Gasser, Urs (ed.). "The Multiple Harms of Sea Lions" (PDF). Perspectives on Harmful Speech Online. Berkman Klein Center for Internet & Society. p. 14.
- Scott, Eugenie (2004). Confronting Creationism. Reports of National Center for Science Education. Vol. 24/6.
- Scott, Eugenie (1994). "Debates and the Globetrotters". Talk Origins Archive. Retrieved 2017-10-06.