Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
One of the crucial philosophies trending today on both Twitter and on Facebook involves the perils of discussing anything with those outside your inner circle of friends. Why such perils exist has to do with the phenomenon now called the “Kafka Trap.”
Of course, to be part of a society wherein the individual may not wish to share discourse with other people of vastly different beliefs now carries its own very real perils. The differences between the people inside Thought Bubble A and people inside Thought Bubble B become more and more pronounced in direct proportion to the length of time during which neither side has been able to successfully debate various topics with the other side.
From the above-linked article:
- Critical thinking
- 7 linguistic tricks people use to deceive and manipulate you
- Just accept the ‘facts’:
– All white people are racist
– It’s impossible for a black person to be racist
– “Believe women” or you’re a rape apologist
– Gender is a social construct
– White privilege
Having shown how manipulative and psychologically abusive the kafkatrap is, it may seem almost superfluous to observe that it is logically fallacious as well. The particular species of fallacy is sometimes called “panchreston.” This is an argument from which anything can be deduced because it is not falsifiable. Notably, if the Model A kafkatrap is true, the world is divided into two kinds of people:
(a) those who admit they are guilty of thoughtcrime, and
(b) those who are guilty of thoughtcrime because they will not admit to being guilty of thoughtcrime.
“No one can ever be innocent. The subject must be prevented from noticing that this logic convicts and impeaches the operator of the kafkatrap!” – Eric Raymond
The full article is quite enlightening. It fully details each and every one of the various seven linguistic tricks by which the opposing side manages to carry the weight of “proof” that they are the better individuals and therefore they and they alone can win any argument.
Even the master of modern-day logical persuasion, Jordan Peterson, has been whiplashed during a debate in which an angry black preacher and an Oxfordian gentleman managed to pull off various Kafkatrap illogical fallacies. Although he managed to slam those two during his rebuttal, when the attacks first went down, his ability to look more convincing than they were was seriously impaired.
Kafka is the master of a surrealist style of writing, in which strange and bewildering events in the lives of his characters suddenly, unexpectedly crop up. These events pose insurmountable odds.
The idea behind the Kafka trap has to do with Kafka’s tale “The Trial” in which an unassuming clerk is hauled into court, where he is not offered any clues as to why he is being charged, and he cannot manage a defense. This is due to the Catch 22-ness of the trap of illogical but powerful behaviors and statements of the judge and others that are used to snare him into their judgment of guilty.
I invite everyone here to take the time to read the article. It will perhaps nudge away some of the weight you may have been carrying from the last time you engaged in debating some snowflake friend or relative and then they somehow trapped you into the bleak corner of “thoughtcrime.”Published in