Of the top of my head I can think of a few items to add to the list.
Appeal to intra-group agreement - An example would be “If the FSM really exists, our family/tribe/facebook fraternity would have to be broken apart” in this case the person is putting the fate of a social bond at stake so as to counterbalance the value or arguing with him. You may win the debate over me, but you’ll destroy your community—is the spirit behind it.
Appeal to Low energy level—This is mostly used in social situations in which the energy level is high, everyone is having a good time, for instance. If an argument is going on, someone may slightly start fading her attention away, looking bored, so as to oblige those arguing to change topic to keep the energy level high. I do it all the time when people start arguing about astrology or god. I suppose this is used mostly by alpha males and women, since they have more power over the group. It can also be done explicitly, by complaining, if the person has enough status in the group.
Appeal to common cause—“I see your point (even though she doesn’t) but we must remember that we are here for a reason, the Party must prevail” The cause justifies the end of the debate. We shouldn’t risk the causes loss over such a mundane issue.
Appeal to status lowering—“Well, yes, you may think freezing your head is a rational idea, but what do you think your girlfriend would think of this?” Rationality is supposed to include baby-producing strategies, so this can be quite appealing in the presence of someone who would actually think less of you for an opinion.
Appeal to biological need—Anything that one’s body can do that will halt the debate can be used as an excuse, bathroom, thirst, headache, sleepiness. Even a short break might bring the debate’s energy level below its working threshold.
Appeal to time constraint—same as above, but due to external circumstance.
Appeal to lack of intelligence—This is quite unlikely to happen in this blog comments, but someone could easily declare incapacity to understand subject X in order to stop someone else from arguing Y, given both know that X is required knowledge to grasp the persuasiveness of Y.
Appeal to humor—As most of the above, this is not epistemic in nature, but it is by far the one most available in my memory along with inescapable assumptions. Thor is trying to be serious, but everything that he says seriously is turned into a joke, or everything new. In this way it is never possible to delve deep, and the argument fades away.
Appeal to lack of intelligence—This is quite unlikely to happen in this blog comments, but someone could easily declare incapacity to understand subject X in order to stop someone else from arguing Y, given both know that X is required knowledge to grasp the persuasiveness of Y.
This is one that is sometimes best conveyed through action rather than stated explicitly.
Of the top of my head I can think of a few items to add to the list.
Appeal to intra-group agreement - An example would be “If the FSM really exists, our family/tribe/facebook fraternity would have to be broken apart” in this case the person is putting the fate of a social bond at stake so as to counterbalance the value or arguing with him. You may win the debate over me, but you’ll destroy your community—is the spirit behind it.
Appeal to Low energy level—This is mostly used in social situations in which the energy level is high, everyone is having a good time, for instance. If an argument is going on, someone may slightly start fading her attention away, looking bored, so as to oblige those arguing to change topic to keep the energy level high. I do it all the time when people start arguing about astrology or god. I suppose this is used mostly by alpha males and women, since they have more power over the group. It can also be done explicitly, by complaining, if the person has enough status in the group.
Appeal to common cause—“I see your point (even though she doesn’t) but we must remember that we are here for a reason, the Party must prevail” The cause justifies the end of the debate. We shouldn’t risk the causes loss over such a mundane issue.
Appeal to status lowering—“Well, yes, you may think freezing your head is a rational idea, but what do you think your girlfriend would think of this?” Rationality is supposed to include baby-producing strategies, so this can be quite appealing in the presence of someone who would actually think less of you for an opinion.
Appeal to biological need—Anything that one’s body can do that will halt the debate can be used as an excuse, bathroom, thirst, headache, sleepiness. Even a short break might bring the debate’s energy level below its working threshold.
Appeal to time constraint—same as above, but due to external circumstance.
Appeal to lack of intelligence—This is quite unlikely to happen in this blog comments, but someone could easily declare incapacity to understand subject X in order to stop someone else from arguing Y, given both know that X is required knowledge to grasp the persuasiveness of Y.
Appeal to humor—As most of the above, this is not epistemic in nature, but it is by far the one most available in my memory along with inescapable assumptions. Thor is trying to be serious, but everything that he says seriously is turned into a joke, or everything new. In this way it is never possible to delve deep, and the argument fades away.
This is one that is sometimes best conveyed through action rather than stated explicitly.