#1. KAFKA TRAP. Author Eric Raymond coined the term Kafkatrapping
in his 2010 article in which he presented a style of argument that is common
today in the WT Organization but has it’s origins in The Trial, a
book written in 1915 by Franz Kafka. In the book, the lead character is
arrested and accused of serious crimes which are NEVER SPECIFIED. Thus, each
person can conjure up in their own mind the “charges” against the accused and of course, “where there's smoke, there's fire.”
EXAMPLE. In the WT, when it is
announced that a member is being disfellowshipped (DFd), it is generally for
“Conduct Unbecoming of a Christian” which could be any of the following: lying,
stealing, abuse of alcohol or drugs, use of tobacco, fornication, adultery,
homosexual or other unlawful sexual conduct, gambling, idolatry, celebrating
holidays, military service, holding beliefs contrary to WT doctrine, meeting
with DFd persons, or anything remotely related to the above.
When the announcement
occurs, guess which charge is the one whispered and gossiped about—some kind of
sexual sin. The elders cannot discuss the case so the “some kind of sexual sin”
sticks to the accused. This happened to my mother- and father-in-law. They had
legitimate questions about the WT doctrine that Jesus is not God (see my series
Presto Change-O Part 1 here). An elder met with them
and his only question was: “Are you going to follow WT doctrine.” When they
both answered, “If you are not going to address our questions—then NO!” They
were DFd the next Sunday. Years later my mother-in-law ran into an old JW
friend who said, “M****, “were you involved in adultery?” M**** answered, “heavens
no, would you like to come in and have a cup of coffee and I’ll explain what
really happened.” The JW replied, “Oh No, I don’t want to jeopardize my Paradise Earth.”
#2. PROOF BY VERBOSITY (aka "PROOF BY INTIMIDATION) is an argument that is so convoluted, jargon-laden and unintelligible, that the listener is simply forced to accept it, or admit their ignorance and the fact they can’t follow it and don’t understand it. This style of argumentation is often used by experts, or at least wannabe experts with a good vocabulary (Elders, Overseeers, etc.) It’s purposely making the argument difficult to understand in an effort to intimidate people into accepting it, and no one can argue with you because they don’t understand your comment or what you’re really saying. It can't be understood and it sounds smart due to all of the big words and Bible verses used, and this person seems, or at least sounds like an expert and they seem so confident about it all, so it must be right… right?
#2. PROOF BY VERBOSITY (aka "PROOF BY INTIMIDATION) is an argument that is so convoluted, jargon-laden and unintelligible, that the listener is simply forced to accept it, or admit their ignorance and the fact they can’t follow it and don’t understand it. This style of argumentation is often used by experts, or at least wannabe experts with a good vocabulary (Elders, Overseeers, etc.) It’s purposely making the argument difficult to understand in an effort to intimidate people into accepting it, and no one can argue with you because they don’t understand your comment or what you’re really saying. It can't be understood and it sounds smart due to all of the big words and Bible verses used, and this person seems, or at least sounds like an expert and they seem so confident about it all, so it must be right… right?
EXAMPLE. The WT use of Proof by Verbosity can be seen in my blog AN ANCIENT MANUSCRIPT SUPPORTS GOD’S NAME a 4’51” video at JW.ORG which is here.
EXAMPLE. The WT use of Proof by Verbosity can be seen in my blog AN ANCIENT MANUSCRIPT SUPPORTS GOD’S NAME a 4’51” video at JW.ORG which is here.
#3. GATLING
GUN is a style of argumentation in which someone asserts as
many different half-truths and falsehoods into as short of a time span as
possible, rapid fire machine gun style, knowing that their opponent has no real
chance of debunking and refuting every single point presented in the limited
time at the homeowners door.
The Gatling Gun is about the quantity, not the quality of arguments. It's about over whelming people with as many false hoods and fallacies in the limited time available.
Many Gatling Gun arguments attack straw men and refute points no one made, and are often full of PRATT's (Point Refuted a Thousand Times) but that doesn't stop intellectually dishonest JW's from presenting them as if they were sound and valid arguments.
Example. I critiqued the WT booklet, What Does the Bible Really Teach. It is often used as the first book to be studied when a homeowner agrees to a WT "Bible Study." Here is the first of the 25 blogs I took to cover the entire booklet and chapter after chapter is a good example of the Gatling Gun method of arguing.
The Gatling Gun is about the quantity, not the quality of arguments. It's about over whelming people with as many false hoods and fallacies in the limited time available.
Many Gatling Gun arguments attack straw men and refute points no one made, and are often full of PRATT's (Point Refuted a Thousand Times) but that doesn't stop intellectually dishonest JW's from presenting them as if they were sound and valid arguments.
Example. I critiqued the WT booklet, What Does the Bible Really Teach. It is often used as the first book to be studied when a homeowner agrees to a WT "Bible Study." Here is the first of the 25 blogs I took to cover the entire booklet and chapter after chapter is a good example of the Gatling Gun method of arguing.
#4. HOARE’S DICTUM. This dictum is named after a computer scientist, C.A.R. Hoare, who said, “There are two methods in software design. One is to make the program so simple, there are obviously no errors. The other is to make it so complicated, there are NO OBVIOUS ERRORS.” This applies to logical arguments as well. You can make the argument so simple that there are obviously no errors. Or you can make it so complicated that there are NO OBVIOUS ERRORS.”
EXAMPLE. A year ago, I opened my door to two young JW’s. Our conversation revolved around “a New Heaven and a New Earth.” They were not able to answer some of my questions but said they would return the following week. One of the young men came back with and older JW who was packing a huge book bag that caused him to stoop over as he hauled it into my living room. He dug through the bag and pulled out a book comparable to Merriam-Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary. He was talking about “a New Heaven and a New Earth” and started in 2 Peter 3 (but only read verses 5-7), then to Psalm 37, Proverbs 2, Matthew 6, Psalm 104, Genesis 11, 1 Kings 2, 1 Chronicles 16, Psalm 96 and finally Revelation 21, all to prove that a "New Heavens and a New Earth" does not mean this earth will be destroyed and replaced but that this present Earth will be rejuvenated and is the place where all JW's but the 144,000 will live. Hoare’s Dictum in action. I have blogged about the 144,000 here.
#5. ON THE
SPOT FALLACY occurs when the homeowner is
considered wrong (or even incapable of having an opinion) if they cannot recite
specific verses or WT publications they are quoting. The JW thinks the homeowner has be an expert on a topic in order to discuss anything related to it
and, at that, an expert with flawless memory.
EXAMPLE. The average JW, going door-to-door, has been told
that the typical homeowner they will encounter has little or no knowledge
about the Bible. Therefore, the JW doesn’t expect them to be able to quote
Bible verses to refute what the door-knocker is pitching. When the homeowner
just paraphrases a verse instead of quoting the exact verse and/or fails to give its correct citation, the JW dismisses the
entire argument that the homeowner doesn’t know what he is talking about and
goes on to the next door.
#6. DOUBLESPEAK
is ambiguous language
used to deceive and mislead you. It is the exact opposite of plain speaking.
“Doublespeak is language
which pretends to communicate but doesn’t. It is language which makes the bad
seem good, the negative seem positive, the unpleasant seem unattractive, or at
least tolerable. It is language which avoids, shifts or denies responsibility;
language which is at variance with its real or purported meaning. It is
language which conceals or prevents thought.”
William Lutz,
Doublespeak
Doublespeak is commonly
used throughout the corporate world, in banking and finance, the legal system
(“legalese”), the military, and of course by politicians to avoid answering
questions without directly stating that they’re ignoring the question.
EXAMPLE. This is plainly evident by the WT's choice of Titles for their various publications. For example, The Truth that Leads to Eternal Life actually leads the reader to eternal torment in hell. See my blog on this book here.
What Happens at a Bible Study? (a WT video), actually shows that all the JW's in the video are studying a WT publication and not the Bible. My blog about it is here.
Good News from God, has a basic problem in that the publication is full of news from the WT and not from God. I blogged about this publication here.
What can the Bible Teach Us? also has a basic problem in that it teaches one what the WT wants them to know and avoids what the Bible really teaches on a subject. I blogged about this publication here.
What does the Bible Really Teach? only teaches WT doctrine not Bible doctrine. I blogged about this publication here.
And finally, the article titled, Working Hard for the Reward of Eternal Life, tells the JW's they are working hard for Eternal Life, however, the Bible teaches that Eternal Life is a free gift from God. See Ephesians 2:8-10, "For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith and this is not from yourselves, it is the gift of God, not by works, so that no on can boast. For we are God's handiwork, created in Christ Jesus to do good works, which God prepared in advance for us to do." I also blogged about this topic here.
And finally, the article titled, Working Hard for the Reward of Eternal Life, tells the JW's they are working hard for Eternal Life, however, the Bible teaches that Eternal Life is a free gift from God. See Ephesians 2:8-10, "For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith and this is not from yourselves, it is the gift of God, not by works, so that no on can boast. For we are God's handiwork, created in Christ Jesus to do good works, which God prepared in advance for us to do." I also blogged about this topic here.
#7. WEASEL WORDS (aka APPEAL
TO ANONYMOUS AUTHORITY) Sometimes people try to introduce
anonymous authorities into a conversation in order to make their arguments or
claims sound more persuasive and valid than they really are.
EXAMPLE. The most outlandish use
of Weasel Words occurs when one asks, “Who were the translators of the WT
Bible, The New World Translation?” In
1961, the entire set of WT translations was published. Some revisions have been
made since that initial edition, but the NWT
essentially remains as it was originally published.
In an article on the NWT, one WT book states that it is
"a translation of the Holy Scriptures made directly from Hebrew, Aramaic,
and Greek into modern-day English by a committee of anointed witnesses of
Jehovah" (Reasoning From the
Scriptures, 276). In the same book, in direct answer to my original
question, the following statement is made: "When presenting as a gift the
publishing rights to their translation, the New World Bible Translation
Committee requested that its members remain anonymous. The Watch Tower Bible
and Tract Society of Pennsylvania has honored their request" (Reasoning,
277). Weasel Words to the max.
#8. A THOUGHT
TERMINATING CLICHÉ is a
lazy statement that is used to shut down a discussion or a debate, and to get
you to stop thinking and stop asking questions. They’re commonly used by
intellectually lazy and/or intellectually dishonest people, when they don’t
have a good answer to your question, or a valid counterargument to your point.
EXAMPLE. I have had this technique used
on me a number of times when I have talked with JW’s and asked questions that
they were unable to answer. They often would say, “I’ll do some more research on this
and get back to you.” I give them my phone number but never hear back.
Also, when I answer my door to
a JW and the door knocker does not want to answer a question, they will turn and
quickly walk away stating, “I am not here to argue.”
Lastly, if I am showing a JW a page from a WT publication, even a WT Bible, the JW will say, "Apostates have photo shopped that publication, then changed the content to put the WT in bad light" OR they will say I am an Apostate (which I am not) and then refuse to talk further.
#9. RE-DEFINING WORDS.
In order to thoroughly confuse non-JW's and give their members the feeling that they are "Christians", the WT has redefined Biblical words to mean something totally different from their historical, Christian definition.
By redefining words the JW can seemingly agree with a Christian but in reality not agree. Where there is a definite doctrinal difference, by redefining words, no difference can be detected. This is why many nominal Christians and JW's themselves can declare, "JW's are Christian," or "JW's are Born Again" or "JW's believe Jesus is God." I have blogged about this topic here.
#10. CHANGING THE SUBJECT. In a debate, When a person is losing an argument he/she tries to redirect the attention of their opponent to another subject area (for a JW this would be to another Bible verse) where he/she thinks they can look better relative to the person they are debating, but admits to no change of subject and pretends to be refuting the original on-subject statement of his opponent. JW's often preface their Changing the Subject with, "What about." By Changing the Subject the JW does not have to acknowledge that they have lost the argument on the original topic.
Lastly, if I am showing a JW a page from a WT publication, even a WT Bible, the JW will say, "Apostates have photo shopped that publication, then changed the content to put the WT in bad light" OR they will say I am an Apostate (which I am not) and then refuse to talk further.
#9. RE-DEFINING WORDS.
In order to thoroughly confuse non-JW's and give their members the feeling that they are "Christians", the WT has redefined Biblical words to mean something totally different from their historical, Christian definition.
By redefining words the JW can seemingly agree with a Christian but in reality not agree. Where there is a definite doctrinal difference, by redefining words, no difference can be detected. This is why many nominal Christians and JW's themselves can declare, "JW's are Christian," or "JW's are Born Again" or "JW's believe Jesus is God." I have blogged about this topic here.
#10. CHANGING THE SUBJECT. In a debate, When a person is losing an argument he/she tries to redirect the attention of their opponent to another subject area (for a JW this would be to another Bible verse) where he/she thinks they can look better relative to the person they are debating, but admits to no change of subject and pretends to be refuting the original on-subject statement of his opponent. JW's often preface their Changing the Subject with, "What about." By Changing the Subject the JW does not have to acknowledge that they have lost the argument on the original topic.
Famed Harvard Law professor Alan Dershowitz
said, “When the truth hurts my client, my job is to suppress the truth.” The WT is in the business of suppressing the truth, often by Changing the Subject (See my series Presto Change-O Part 1 is here.)
Changing the subject and throwing your opponent off track is used constantly by JW's. The attempt is to shift the focus from the Bible verse that shows WT doctrine is wrong in a certain area, to another verse that the JW hopes will prove his original point OR at the very least the JW will not have to admit that the WT is wrong on the Bible verse previously under discussion.
When you discover this attempt to Change the Subject and stray away from the main point, keep focused on the original question and keep coming back to it as many times as you need to without falling for another subject. This takes discipline but is well worth the effort.
The definitive article on Linguistic Tricks is here at Life Lessons. A word of caution. The Life Lessons article contains coarse, crude, inappropriate language.
The definitive article on Linguistic Tricks is here at Life Lessons. A word of caution. The Life Lessons article contains coarse, crude, inappropriate language.
