Godwin's Law and Plazmid's Addendum
May. 7th, 2008 08:03 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
jackofallgeeksSo here's a little bit of net.culture for you all, mostly because it gets
misused all the time. Some of you may have heard of Godwin's Law, or in full
"Godwin's Rule of Nazi Analogies." The rule states, rather simply, that as
an online discussion grows longer, the probability that someone will make a
comparison to Hitler or the Nazis approaches one. The Rule is a cautionary
one to discourage people from making inappropriate or hyperbolic (I'm not
sure that's right; what's the adjectival form of 'hyperbole'?) comparisons,
lest the appropriate ones lose their impact.
The rule was allegedly established in 1990 and has been corrupted over
time. When I was first introduced to it, the form was, "when a comparison
to Hitler or the Nazis occure in an online discussion, the conversation is
over." Often times Godwin's Law is
conflated with the reducio ad Hitlerum logical fallacy (which is the
fallacy you get when you argue something like Hitler was a painter, so all
painters are wrong/evil/Nazis/etc). It is notable that Godwin's Law doesn't
imply that all such comparissons are fallacious, only that the likelihood of
one becomes certain as the discussion goes on. Even a valid comparisson to
Nazis satisfies Godwin's Law.
I bring this up mostly because of a reference in the comments of a Slashdot
article on the upcoming Iron Sky move
(Nazis... in SPACE!) and the subsequent assertion of Plazmid's
Addendum: As the popularity of Godwin's Law increases, the chances of
its misapplication approaches one.
misused all the time. Some of you may have heard of Godwin's Law, or in full
"Godwin's Rule of Nazi Analogies." The rule states, rather simply, that as
an online discussion grows longer, the probability that someone will make a
comparison to Hitler or the Nazis approaches one. The Rule is a cautionary
one to discourage people from making inappropriate or hyperbolic (I'm not
sure that's right; what's the adjectival form of 'hyperbole'?) comparisons,
lest the appropriate ones lose their impact.
The rule was allegedly established in 1990 and has been corrupted over
time. When I was first introduced to it, the form was, "when a comparison
to Hitler or the Nazis occure in an online discussion, the conversation is
over." Often times Godwin's Law is
conflated with the reducio ad Hitlerum logical fallacy (which is the
fallacy you get when you argue something like Hitler was a painter, so all
painters are wrong/evil/Nazis/etc). It is notable that Godwin's Law doesn't
imply that all such comparissons are fallacious, only that the likelihood of
one becomes certain as the discussion goes on. Even a valid comparisson to
Nazis satisfies Godwin's Law.
I bring this up mostly because of a reference in the comments of a Slashdot
article on the upcoming Iron Sky move
(Nazis... in SPACE!) and the subsequent assertion of Plazmid's
Addendum: As the popularity of Godwin's Law increases, the chances of
its misapplication approaches one.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
Hee!
Date: 2008-05-07 02:36 pm (UTC)Good times and flames wars abound!
Re: Hee!
Date: 2008-05-07 08:55 pm (UTC)Re: Hee!
Date: 2008-05-08 01:20 pm (UTC)Re: Hee!
Date: 2008-05-08 01:38 pm (UTC)Re: Hee!
Date: 2008-05-09 12:51 am (UTC)Also...
Date: 2008-05-07 02:38 pm (UTC)stalkedfriended you. :DA few years ago the had an April Fools like that...
Date: 2008-05-07 08:54 pm (UTC)Re: A few years ago the had an April Fools like that...
Date: 2008-05-08 04:00 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-05-15 10:18 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-05-15 10:20 pm (UTC)