Link to original article
Welcome to The Nonlinear Library, where we use Text-to-Speech software to convert the best writing from the Rationalist and EA communities into audio. This is: Mob and Bailey, published by Screwtape on May 25, 2023 on LessWrong.
Epistemological status: Moderately confident that this is a more useful way to use a concept that has been expanded upon by others.
Previous building blocks: See Logical Rudeness and All Another Brick in the Motte and for the foundations, as well as Against Accusing People of Motte and Bailey for the direct predecessor.
If you haven’t read the previous building blocks, the core idea is called the Motte and Bailey. A Motte and Bailey argument is what you call it when someone makes a clearly supported and uncontested claim, then makes an outrageous but advantageous claim, then swaps between these two claims whenever it's useful to them. It draws from the medieval tactic of having an easily farmable bailey right next to a heavily fortified motte, then moving your peasants and troops back and forth between them whenever raiders come or leave.
I
Amy and Bob would like to have a civil discussion about a philosophical difference they have. Their conversation goes something like this:
Amy: I don't understand why you think tautologies are important. I mean, you can't get any extra information out of them, right?Bob: There are actually a number of different kinds of tautologies. For example, a logical tautology might say "either X equals Y or X does not equal Y" and while you might be correct that no new information is gained from this, I find it helps me organize my thoughts.A: Ah, I didn't know that. I've mostly seen them used as rhetorical devices.B: They can be used that way, but it's far from the most interesting thing about them for me.A: As long as people are going to keep using tautologies to win arguments though, how do we help those who don’t understand them well enough to defend against tautology based arguments?B: Oh go soak your head.
I think if you learned more about them you’d be able to actually counter them when people did use them in arguments.A: Even if I studied tautologies enough to do so, I worry that making a general rule of needing to study all potential rhetorical devices to be able to defend against them might be prohibitively difficult.B: As much as I love tautologies, I do think tautology proponents should be more careful in their usage.B: At least as long as we have to deal with idiots who try to ban anything they don’t understand.
This conversation disintegrated quickly. Bob seems to be moving between the position that tautologies are one way to organize information, and the position that if you don’t understand them there’s something wrong with you. This looks like a straightforward example of Motte and Bailey.
II
Imagine Bob is the vice-president of the Tautologies club at a well respected college, and he has just been invited into a very nice conference room by some campus authority.
Authority: We've had some complaints about the behavior of your club. Apparently proponents of tautologies are disruptive, disrespectful, and frankly prone to outrageous acts.Bob: What? That catches me completely by surprise: one of our members, Carol, has a perfect behavioral record- no infractions at all in the entire four years of her time here at the university.Authority: Yes but-Bob: Also, our secretary Dean just got a commendation last semester for Showing Proper Decorum. Isn't he going to the Competitive Decorum Displays next fall? Surely you aren't saying that he's disrespectful!Authority: No but-Bob: In addition, I happen to know that our treasurer Evan is on the boards of several charities with you.
Really, I think the Tautology Club is full of wonderful people!Authority: Then what do you have to say about your club president screaming "B is B, motherfkers!" in the middle of a class before running up to the front of the room to spray paint your club slogan onto the professor's chest?!Bob...
view more