Black & White and Gray

[carn]

Some (gray) people seem to claim some other (black&white) people have a worldview somewhat lacking, because supposedly the latter people for example persist in seeing only white or black, although there are many shades between the two.

Without naming anybody, i have to admit, that such a charge is from my POV illogical, wrong, ad hominem and even dishonest.

Illogical because what is actually critized? If there is gray, there must be black and white (that is how one gets gray, by mixing black and white); hence, some things many things will be gray, but some few others will be black or white; people will try to identify, what is gray, what is white and what is black (cause its important to know); some people will have differing opinions about various issues.

But when only one issue is discussed and some of those thinking there is gray, charging others of only seeing black and white, logically they could only support the charge, that in this instance the other side wrongly identifies something as black/white although its gray; hence, it is illogical to use one instance to support a general judgement; one could only conclude that someone persist in seeing things only black and white, if one would have discussions about many, many topics and regularly sees that the other reverts to black and white and misses the gray; but in my experience a single topic is sufficient for the charge to be brought up.

What is the logic behind? if there is gray, there is black and white, if there is no black and white there is no gray and we can stop wasting time discussing it.

Wrong, because the number of people actually locked too much into black and white are a lot smaller than the number of people accused to be that way; just opening any news site and a host of topic springs into my eyes, where probably very few people would argue in black/white patterns; e.g. ISIS power must be limited, arm “moderates” to fight them?arm Assad to fight them? Arm Kurds to fight them? Arm Turkey to fight them and Kurds? Arm whoever happens to rule in Bagdad? Fight with own forces? The number of people considering that a black/white issue is probably very small and i would not be surprised if it were actually full zero.

Is the charge used inflationary?

Ad hominem because how dumb one claims the other to be, if the other supposedly is too stupid to notice that Hitler going for world dominance and having conquered 3/4 of Europe with Hitler’s ally Japan having conquered good chunk of asia makes the question of alliance with Stalin certainly into a non-black/white issue, especially as literally it was said “He is a devil, but he is our devil” about Stalin? To even suggest that any somewhat educated person is too dumb to see the gray there, is ad hominem.

Is it used somewhat/often/regularly as ad hominem?

And even dishonest because of 2 recurring issues:

1. Many accusing others of being too black/white seem to have their own “pet” issues, with which they objectively fall into the trap themselve; examples for topics where many such people suddenly are all black/white seem to be climate change, migration, capitalism, death penalty, view of islam.
2. In discussion about abortion a lot of people raising the black/white charge vs me in the end of the discussion turn out to be all black/white themselves, cause the consider abortion to be pure shining perfect beautiful white; ok, fine, their opinion, but it didn’t make sense to charge black/white problem when they themselves know they are black/white about the issue; actually, it seemed to be only a dishonest rhethorical trick to throw me off balance and sew doubt about my position (actually, i consider such a charge nearly a red flag for pro-abort, cause people actually seeing gray in abortion are usally not bothered about people with differing positions, since their are doubting themselves); and with other topics i have sometimes similarly the impression, that its just a dishonest rhethorical trick.

Is the charge often dishonest?

 

[Vic_Taltrees_UK]

It is about having a different standard for themselves from what they hold others (or selected others) to. A huge amount of people do it. I can afford to avoid engaging with them at all, which may be difficult to achieve in your walk of life.

Perhaps one may ask God to bring to mind something even greyer - so grey it would fox even them.

It’s very hard work to constantly sidestep straw man arguments, they are extremely prevalent.

Probably we should try to argue their case better than they are doing - they are never good at it (though good enough to fool the public).

Sometimes, double standards can be brought home where it hurts - for every right there is a wrong, which they might think twice about, and for every wrong there is a right, which they might actually value.

It’s not easy though.

 

[carn]

It is about having a different standard for themselves from what they hold others (or selected others) to.

Its not so much different standards for themselves that puzzles me; its that without black and white there is no gray and hence arguing against black and white existing makes the whole discussion about gray completely meaningless.