Because I’m not dismissing the whole thing. That notion is being conjured and argued against (a strawman argument). I specifically said he should be investigated and prosecuted. It’s the pre-5yo part that weakens the case and should be dropped, and we shouldn’t pussyfoot around that if we want a solid case (a judicial one and in the court of public opinion).
The strawman is the person I replied to arguing against dismissing the entire case based on the claim of three-year-olds having useful memories. And rudely, I might add. I never said that the entire case should be dismissed. They made that up. That was the strawman.
Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In@lemmy.world 11 hours ago
How is this a strawman argument?
CannonFodder@lemmy.world 9 hours ago
Because I’m not dismissing the whole thing. That notion is being conjured and argued against (a strawman argument). I specifically said he should be investigated and prosecuted. It’s the pre-5yo part that weakens the case and should be dropped, and we shouldn’t pussyfoot around that if we want a solid case (a judicial one and in the court of public opinion).
Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In@lemmy.world 9 hours ago
I agree with your reasoning. Personally I would describe it as being a weak case rather than a strawman which usually involves misrepresentation.
CannonFodder@lemmy.world 7 hours ago
The strawman is the person I replied to arguing against dismissing the entire case based on the claim of three-year-olds having useful memories. And rudely, I might add. I never said that the entire case should be dismissed. They made that up. That was the strawman.