I don’t think they’re either really “on purpose” or “accidents”. It’s not calculated or truly random, it’s just who these people naturally are. And it plays because unfortunately a lot of us Americans are idiots.
Yeah that’s how I see it too. Political strategist types can’t understand that not everything is a grand strategy. They assume if they can’t understand the strategy it must be 5-D chess or whatever. But maybe there is no strategy, and they’re just being idiots?
It’s game theory terminology, like flight is a “strategy”, not that the bird (or bacterial spore or whatever) has the slightest clue about what it’s doing.
It sounds better than “what works is what works”, I guess.
In the biological/evolutionary world “strategy” has a very different meaning than the colloquial usage here. we know animals, bacteria, plants, etc can’t actively “strategize” like humans do.
If a monkey does something, sees that it works, and continues doing that, is that a “strategy”? I suppose that depends on one’s POV, at which point it doesn’t seem “wrong” to say it, nor wrong to not say it.
Gish galloping requires constant fiasco. Now are they all on purpose or are some of them happy accidents?
See also: Reverse Gish Gallop. I just had someone try to pull that on me yesterday in [email protected], i.e. they’re everywhere.
That was great! Thank you
I don’t think they’re either really “on purpose” or “accidents”. It’s not calculated or truly random, it’s just who these people naturally are. And it plays because unfortunately a lot of us Americans are idiots.
Yeah that’s how I see it too. Political strategist types can’t understand that not everything is a grand strategy. They assume if they can’t understand the strategy it must be 5-D chess or whatever. But maybe there is no strategy, and they’re just being idiots?
It’s game theory terminology, like flight is a “strategy”, not that the bird (or bacterial spore or whatever) has the slightest clue about what it’s doing.
It sounds better than “what works is what works”, I guess.
In the biological/evolutionary world “strategy” has a very different meaning than the colloquial usage here. we know animals, bacteria, plants, etc can’t actively “strategize” like humans do.
If a monkey does something, sees that it works, and continues doing that, is that a “strategy”? I suppose that depends on one’s POV, at which point it doesn’t seem “wrong” to say it, nor wrong to not say it.
“flood the zone” strategy