Greg Lukianoff's The Canceling of the American Mind

For context:

• "If you think you possess the truth, you do not seek it.

  "The [present-day] institutions' purpose is to give students [the] tools to detect, understand, and then remediate, oppression."

  – Both said by Peter Boghossian, in "Peter Boghossian on Critical Thinking, Failing Universities, and Why Debate Matters", Dad Saves America, 2024-May-9.

• "[The book] contains no discussion of the long, ...overtly declared effort by neo-Marxists[,] to reach the point where they can do exactly what the book laments." – from the review, "Useful but badly unbalanced", 2024-Jan-1.

The following are extracts (for review purposes) from The Canceling of the American Mind: Cancel Culture Undermines Trust and Threatens Us All―But There Is a Solution, Greg Lukianoff & Rikki Schlott, 2023-Oct:

Foreword by Jonathan Haidt

[Some important untruths are:]

• "The Untruth of Fragility: What doesn't kill you makes you weaker.

• "The Untruth of Emotional Reasoning: Always trust your feelings.

• "The Untruth of Us Versus Them: Life is a battle[,] between good people and evil people." – pp. xi–xii

Introduction: Pandora's Toolbox

• "I want to win...And with these tools I can win every argument.

• "Bad people like you only have bad opinions!

• "[O]nly good people like me have good opinions!" – p. 4

• "The Great Untruth of Ad Hominem: '[B]ad people only have bad opinions.' " – p. 8

Chapter 12: Fixing K–12

• "Good people are not always right, and bad people are not always wrong." – p. 265

Chapter 5: No-Man's-Land

Classic Rhetorical Dodges

• "Whataboutism: Defending against criticism of your side by bringing up the other side's alleged wrongdoing.

• "Straw-manning.

• "Minimization:

1. " 'This isn't happening.'

2. " 'This is happening, but not in large enough numbers to warrant attention.'

3. " 'This is happening, and it's actually a good thing.'

4. " 'The people who oppose this thing are the real problem.'

• "Motte and Bailey arguments: Conflating two arguments—a reasonable one (the motte) and an unreasonable one (the bailey):

  • " '[The] debater retreats to an uncontroversial claim when challenged on a controversial one.'

• "Underdogging: Claiming [that] your viewpoint is more valid than your opponent's because you speak for a disadvantaged party." – pp.93–97

Ad Hominem

• "Accusations of bad faith: Asserting that your opponent is being disingenuous[,] or has a sinister, selfish, and/or ulterior motive.

• "Asserting that your opponent is hypocritical about a given argument without actually checking the consistency of their record.

• " 'That's offensive': Responding to an idea you don't like with 'That's offensive,' rather than engaging with its substance.

• "Offense archeology: Digging through someone's past comments to find speech that hasn't aged well.

• "Making stuff up: Fabricating information to bolster a weak argument by attacking your opponent—and asserting it with confidence!" – pp. 98–101

Chapter 6: The Perfect Rhetorical Fortress

[To discount others, this fortress employs the following questions:]

• "Is the Speaker Conservative?

• "What's the Speaker's Race?

• "What's the Speaker's Sex?

• "What's the Speaker's Sexuality?

• "Is the Speaker Trans or Cis?

• "Can the Speaker Be Accused of Being 'Phobic'?

• "Are They Guilty by Association?

• "Did the Speaker Lose Their Cool?

• "Did the Speaker Violate a 'Thought Terminating Cliché '?

[and also the following techniques:]

• "Can You Emotionally Blackmail Someone?

• "Darkly Hint [that] Something Else Is What's Really Going On." – pp.115–128

Chapter 8: The Efficient Rhetorical Fortress

[In this fortress:]

• "You don't have to listen to liberals.

• "You don't have to listen to experts.

• "You don't have to listen to journalists.

• "You don't have to listen to anyone who isn't pro-Trump (for some).

[Also notable: this fortress:]

• "[Is r]ooted in distrust of authority.

• "Takes aim at disloyalty." – pp.165–166

Copyright (c) 2024 Mark D. Blackwell.