Help a Brother Out

[Dimocritus]

Got into a huge argument with my original bass player about the dangers of advertising, especially in regards to kids. He refuted my claim that advertising (or, as it is in America, blatant psychological manipulation and abuse) can be harmful by falling into a straw man argument, in which he called into question my authority on the subject (because I am not an authority, all my arguments are invalid). Not only did he continue to defend immoral and outright dangerous advertising techniques (despite the fact that he has a young daughter, the most susceptible target of said ad practices), he also was incapable of understanding that calling my character into question was not a logically viable means of argument, leading to invalid counterpoints in regards to my original premises.

I have just printed up a packet for him, including guidlines to a logically cogent method of argumentation, as well as a definition of "fallacy" and a description of a straw man fallacy in particular, as well as a few articles from science weekly that help illustrate my position, but not as well as I would like. Does anyone have links to good, preferably pier-reviewed, articles that can help bolster my argument?   

[Nephew Twiddleton]

Here's a start- you can also tailor the search to be more in line with the debate.

http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=psychological+effects+of+advertising&hl=en&btnG=Search&as_sdt=1%2C22&as_sdtp=on

[LMNO]

Also, for general principles,

http://wiki.lesswrong.com/wiki/Bias
and
http://wiki.lesswrong.com/wiki/Overcoming_Bias

[Triple Zero]

(BTW this is the sort of thread you could also put in TFYS, if you want to give that old subforum some traffic)

Some things by Naomi Klein perhaps? Although No Logo is more about the rise of the "Brand" than the dangers of advertising. But she also wrote other stuff.

His argument of questioning your authority on the subject is not strictly a Straw Man fallacy, by the way. Somebody fill me in on what exactly it falls under, though.

Yet, if he keeps making fallacious arguments, why don't you go straight for the jugular and:



Because that guy was totally an authority on advertising.

[LMNO]

It seems that the "questioning your authority" is more like a thing, but used as an offensive tactic.

In a way, he's asking for an Appeal to Authority.  The counter to this is a version of "even if the biggest idiot says the sun is shining, that doesn't make it dark out."

[Dimocritus]

It seems that the "questioning your authority" is more like a thing, but used as an offensive tactic.

In a way, he's asking for an Appeal to Authority.  The counter to this is a version of "even if the biggest idiot says the sun is shining, that doesn't make it dark out."

I actually tried that. Not that exact example, but the same premise. He either didn't get it, or refused to get it. At what point (if ever), after all reasonable attempts are made, is it okay to just punch him in the face?

[LMNO]

So long as you're wearing your "TFYS" rings, any time past the third attempt.

[Cainad (dec.)]

So long as you're wearing your "TFYS" rings, any time past the third attempt.

Funny, I've never heard 'em called that before...

[Phox]

So long as you're wearing your "TFYS" rings, any time past the third attempt.

Yes, what LMNO.

In other regards, I would suggest have him watch How TV Ruined Your Life, in particular, episode 3 "Aspiration". While it's not specifically about advertising, it is about the psychological manipulation in television altogether, so it may be of some use. The other episodes are less applicable to the current debate, but I would highly recommend the entire series to anyone and everyone. This is, of course, in addition everything suggested ITT, and after you punch him in the face.

[AFK]

Here's a paper that speaks to the effects of alcohol advertising on underage drinking.  Not sure if this was the kind of advertising you were talking about but it definitely lays out a good case for how advertising effects adolescent behavior. 

http://www.aafp.org/online/en/home/policy/policies/a/alcoholadvertising.html

If you want more of this kind of thing let me know, I'm sure I can find other links/papers. 

[Cramulus]

Got into a huge argument with my original bass player about the dangers of advertising, especially in regards to kids. He refuted my claim that advertising (or, as it is in America, blatant psychological manipulation and abuse) can be harmful by falling into a straw man argument, in which he called into question my authority on the subject (because I am not an authority, all my arguments are invalid). Not only did he continue to defend immoral and outright dangerous advertising techniques (despite the fact that he has a young daughter, the most susceptible target of said ad practices), he also was incapable of understanding that calling my character into question was not a logically viable means of argument, leading to invalid counterpoints in regards to my original premises.

I have just printed up a packet for him, including guidlines to a logically cogent method of argumentation, as well as a definition of "fallacy" and a description of a straw man fallacy in particular, as well as a few articles from science weekly that help illustrate my position, but not as well as I would like. Does anyone have links to good, preferably pier-reviewed, articles that can help bolster my argument?   

I sense you are bringing articles of war to a mudfight.

I refer you to Cain's Rules for Life (IntermittensXX p32)



Arguing Rarely Persuades People

More often than not, if you argue
with someone, they will become
more set in their ways and more
stubborn, less open to criticism.  If
you have to convince someone, use
examples, not words.


From what it sounds like, your case will be better argued using image macros and snippets from Culture Jam or Adbusters.

[Reginald Ret]

Get specific ads in his house, give him magazines, etc.
Pick a product he now harldy buys and start pushing him over the edge with lots and lots of advertisement.
Place relevant ads all through your emails to him.
send him links to youtube movies of ads for the relevant product.
etc.

[Rumckle]

I sense you are bringing articles of war to a mudfight.

I refer you to Cain's Rules for Life (IntermittensXX p32)



Arguing Rarely Persuades People

More often than not, if you argue
with someone, they will become
more set in their ways and more
stubborn, less open to criticism.  If
you have to convince someone, use
examples, not words.


From what it sounds like, your case will be better argued using image macros and snippets from Culture Jam or Adbusters.

Yes, you need to be careful about these things, see this for more info (I can't remember if I was linked to this from here or not, so sorry if it's a repost).

[Dimocritus]

Got into a huge argument with my original bass player about the dangers of advertising, especially in regards to kids. He refuted my claim that advertising (or, as it is in America, blatant psychological manipulation and abuse) can be harmful by falling into a straw man argument, in which he called into question my authority on the subject (because I am not an authority, all my arguments are invalid). Not only did he continue to defend immoral and outright dangerous advertising techniques (despite the fact that he has a young daughter, the most susceptible target of said ad practices), he also was incapable of understanding that calling my character into question was not a logically viable means of argument, leading to invalid counterpoints in regards to my original premises.

I have just printed up a packet for him, including guidlines to a logically cogent method of argumentation, as well as a definition of "fallacy" and a description of a straw man fallacy in particular, as well as a few articles from science weekly that help illustrate my position, but not as well as I would like. Does anyone have links to good, preferably pier-reviewed, articles that can help bolster my argument?   

I sense you are bringing articles of war to a mudfight.

I refer you to Cain's Rules for Life (IntermittensXX p32)



Arguing Rarely Persuades People

More often than not, if you argue
with someone, they will become
more set in their ways and more
stubborn, less open to criticism.  If
you have to convince someone, use
examples, not words.


From what it sounds like, your case will be better argued using image macros and snippets from Culture Jam or Adbusters.

You're right, Cram, this had crossed my mind. Although, I already told him I was preparing a packet of information for him to go through, so I'm kind of locked-in now. But, I suppose being handed some info isn't exactly arguing at that point, so maybe there's some hope this won't go that bad.

Oh, and anyone have any good links in regards to the effectiveness of advertising in general? I'm curious to see how well most tricks actually work, and which are a waste of ad dollars.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

Got into a huge argument with my original bass player about the dangers of advertising, especially in regards to kids. He refuted my claim that advertising (or, as it is in America, blatant psychological manipulation and abuse) can be harmful by falling into a straw man argument, in which he called into question my authority on the subject (because I am not an authority, all my arguments are invalid). Not only did he continue to defend immoral and outright dangerous advertising techniques (despite the fact that he has a young daughter, the most susceptible target of said ad practices), he also was incapable of understanding that calling my character into question was not a logically viable means of argument, leading to invalid counterpoints in regards to my original premises.

I have just printed up a packet for him, including guidlines to a logically cogent method of argumentation, as well as a definition of "fallacy" and a description of a straw man fallacy in particular, as well as a few articles from science weekly that help illustrate my position, but not as well as I would like. Does anyone have links to good, preferably pier-reviewed, articles that can help bolster my argument?   

I sense you are bringing articles of war to a mudfight.

I refer you to Cain's Rules for Life (IntermittensXX p32)



Arguing Rarely Persuades People

More often than not, if you argue
with someone, they will become
more set in their ways and more
stubborn, less open to criticism.  If
you have to convince someone, use
examples, not words.


From what it sounds like, your case will be better argued using image macros and snippets from Culture Jam or Adbusters.

You're right, Cram, this had crossed my mind. Although, I already told him I was preparing a packet of information for him to go through, so I'm kind of locked-in now. But, I suppose being handed some info isn't exactly arguing at that point, so maybe there's some hope this won't go that bad.

Oh, and anyone have any good links in regards to the effectiveness of advertising in general? I'm curious to see how well most tricks actually work, and which are a waste of ad dollars.

I don't have any handouts, but I will share one thing my boss once told me:

"A good ad needs to do three things: show people your product, show them why they want it, and tell them where to get it".

That company had extraordinarily effective ads with very little verbiage, and he just sold it to Williams-Sonoma and retired. I have always based my advertising model off his, and (back before I went part-time, before the divorce and economy crash) had superb response.

Advertisers use a lot of tricks and gimmicks to sell people things they don't need, but fundamentally I think that the most effective principle is exactly what he said.