I don’t have much time to think on this right now, but perhaps an Anti-Godwin’s law could be useful? Something along the lines of “just because your opponent made a simplistic analogy to Nazism, it does not follow that their overall argument is wrong”.
I don’t have much time to think on this right now, but perhaps an Anti-Godwin’s law could be useful? Something along the lines of “just because your opponent made a simplistic analogy to Nazism, it does not follow that their overall argument is wrong”.
That sounds like a bite-sized refutation of the Worst Argument in the World.
More compactly this is called “Hitler Ate Sugar”.
Nice, I like that.
Warning
Obligatory link
Thanks for the link!