On 1/6/10 I noted that Webdog had 142 posts with strawman (102) and strawmen (40). Now,17 months later, he has added 27 more to his count. He's up to 169 posts with either the singular or plural form of the word. Yep,it is indeed his favorite word when in attack mode.
I think it is clear that Webdog was referring to this as a strawman attack, because it clearly is one.
There is nothing wrong with calling a strawman fallacy out when one truly exists.
If it doesn't exist then it should be quite evident by simply showing how the argument rightly represents the opponent's actual views.
For example, EWandF suggests that we oppose Calvinism on the sole basis that God doesn't allow everyone to be saved, as if that is owed to mankind, or somehow deserved.
It also suggests that we support salvation by works.
Neither of these is an accurate representation of what we actually believe, thus it is a "straw-man fallacy."
He's always in attack mode, scouring the board to pick a fight, and typically quoting scripture as proof-texts, without considering the entire counsel of Gods Word, nor understanding context. Cults implement this strategy as well, as do newer Christians.
All of this, and he doesn't know what the Gospel is.
I think I'll keep track of his strawman/men usage myself. :love2:
How about instead of wasting all that time searching for number of times he used the term "strawman," you actually show how his accusation of such is incorrect, because isn't that the real point here?
Otherwise, this stat only goes to show how often Calvinists here resort to straw-men fallacies.
With such a huge number of references it shouldn't be too difficult to give us some examples of times he got it wrong.