Did she read my article? Reply to Elizabeth Rohr’s ‘Response to ‘The Mexican social unconscious—Part I: The roots of a nation’ and ‘Part II: Politics and group analysis’ by Reyna Hernández-Tubert’

Reyna Hernández-Tubert
{"title":"Did she read my article? Reply to Elizabeth Rohr’s ‘Response to ‘The Mexican social unconscious—Part I: The roots of a nation’ and ‘Part II: Politics and group analysis’ by Reyna Hernández-Tubert’","authors":"Reyna Hernández-Tubert","doi":"10.1177/05333164231167510","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"I have just read Elizabeth Rohr’s (2021) response to my two-part article on ‘The Mexican social unconscious’ (Hernández-Tubert, 2021a, b). This generated mixed feelings in me. On the one hand, she has obviously spent much time and effort in writing it, and this is to be appreciated; she clearly knows Mexico and her account of recent events in my country is mostly accurate, although I cannot share her interpretation of such data. On the other, her account of what she deems to be my main argument is so alien to the meaning I intended to convey that it made me wonder if she had actually read my article, or what had she read in it, perhaps only her interpretation in her own terms, without trying to understand my argument, before expressing her disagreement with it. This type of reasoning is well-known in logic as the ‘straw-man fallacy’ (in this case a ‘straw-woman fallacy’), which occurs when someone takes another person’s argument and distorts or exaggerates it, turning it into an absurdity, and then attacks the first party and disqualifies her for having said what she never said. Such argumentative strategy may be summarised in the motto, ‘Turn your opponent into a straw man and then criticize him for being a dummy.’ 1167510 GAQ0010.1177/05333164231167510Group AnalysisHernández-Tubert: Response to Rohr research-article2023","PeriodicalId":166668,"journal":{"name":"Group Analysis","volume":"19 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Group Analysis","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/05333164231167510","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

I have just read Elizabeth Rohr’s (2021) response to my two-part article on ‘The Mexican social unconscious’ (Hernández-Tubert, 2021a, b). This generated mixed feelings in me. On the one hand, she has obviously spent much time and effort in writing it, and this is to be appreciated; she clearly knows Mexico and her account of recent events in my country is mostly accurate, although I cannot share her interpretation of such data. On the other, her account of what she deems to be my main argument is so alien to the meaning I intended to convey that it made me wonder if she had actually read my article, or what had she read in it, perhaps only her interpretation in her own terms, without trying to understand my argument, before expressing her disagreement with it. This type of reasoning is well-known in logic as the ‘straw-man fallacy’ (in this case a ‘straw-woman fallacy’), which occurs when someone takes another person’s argument and distorts or exaggerates it, turning it into an absurdity, and then attacks the first party and disqualifies her for having said what she never said. Such argumentative strategy may be summarised in the motto, ‘Turn your opponent into a straw man and then criticize him for being a dummy.’ 1167510 GAQ0010.1177/05333164231167510Group AnalysisHernández-Tubert: Response to Rohr research-article2023
她读了我的文章了吗?回复伊丽莎白·罗尔(Elizabeth Rohr)对“墨西哥社会无意识——第一部分:一个国家的根源”和“第二部分:政治和群体分析”的回应,作者:Reyna Hernández-Tubert
我刚刚读了Elizabeth Rohr(2021)对我关于“墨西哥社会无意识”的两篇文章的回应(Hernández-Tubert, 2021a, b)。这让我产生了复杂的感情。一方面,她显然花了很多时间和精力来写作,这是值得赞赏的;她显然了解墨西哥,她对我国最近发生的事件的描述基本上是准确的,尽管我不能同意她对这些数据的解释。另一方面,她对我的主要论点的解释与我想表达的意思是如此的格格不入,这让我怀疑她是否真的读了我的文章,或者她读了什么,也许只是用她自己的方式解释,在表达她的不同意之前,她没有试图理解我的论点。这种类型的推理在逻辑学中被称为“稻草人谬论”(在这种情况下是“稻草人谬论”),当有人接受另一个人的论点并扭曲或夸大它,把它变成荒谬的时候,就会发生这种情况,然后攻击第一方,并取消她说了她从未说过的话的资格。这种辩论策略可以概括为一句格言:“把你的对手变成稻草人,然后批评他是个笨蛋。”' 1167510 GAQ0010.1177/05333164231167510Group AnalysisHernández-Tubert:对Rohr research-article2023的回应
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信