People Twitter

5383 readers

1550 users here now

People tweeting stuff. We allow tweets from anyone.

RULES:

Mark NSFW content.
No doxxing people.
Must be a tweet or similar
No bullying or international politcs
Be excellent to each other.
Provide an archived link to the tweet (or similar) being shown if it's a major figure or a politician.

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

SendMeYourTaTas@sh.itjust.works

pelespirit@sh.itjust.works

1144

"Thought-Terminating Cliches" (lemmy.world)

submitted 7 months ago by The_Picard_Maneuver@lemmy.world to c/whitepeopletwitter@sh.itjust.works

179 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] BeaverDonut@sh.itjust.works 25 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (2 children)

I don't think either of these are really thought terminating cliches inherently. The phrase is more for their usage as a rhetorical device to end arguments in certain ways. They become them when they are "used to intentionally dismiss dissent or justify fallacious logic" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thought-terminating_clich%C3%A9)

[–] ForgotAboutDre@lemmy.world 4 points 7 months ago (2 children)

Ending an argument often involves dismissing dissent. The end of an argument is also the end of thought on that argument. You’re just rewording the original term, that you’re arguing against.

[–] echodot@feddit.uk 5 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 children)

It ends the argument it doesn't complete the argument.

You've essentially just stopped talking about the topic. No consensus has been arrived at. Possibly because one was not possible.

[–] ForgotAboutDre@lemmy.world 4 points 7 months ago

Yes, exactly what the screenshot says.

[–] Sotuanduso@lemm.ee 2 points 7 months ago (1 children)

It's not productive to argue endlessly.

[–] ForgotAboutDre@lemmy.world 3 points 7 months ago (1 children)

I disagree.

[–] Sotuanduso@lemm.ee 1 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Source?

[–] ForgotAboutDre@lemmy.world 4 points 7 months ago (1 children)

I was just joking about arguing endlessly, by carrying on an argument.

[–] denshirenji@lemmy.world 4 points 7 months ago (1 children)

No you weren't.

[–] Sotuanduso@lemm.ee 3 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Yeah they were.

[–] ForgotAboutDre@lemmy.world 2 points 7 months ago (1 children)

No I wasnt

[–] Sotuanduso@lemm.ee 2 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Source?

[–] sukhmel@programming.dev 2 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Source: them's be they, tho

[–] Sotuanduso@lemm.ee 1 points 7 months ago

*though

Your argument is in shambles.

[–] Hegar@kbin.social 0 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

The Wikipedia article has multiple conflicting definitions, including:

"any use of the language, especially repeated phrases, to ward off forbidden thoughts”
"Claim Y sounds catchy. Therefore, claim Y is true."
"the start and finish of any ideological analysis"

The problem is that the term is just BS, in part because the idea it was made to support is complete BS.

Defining 'Totalitarianism' was a cold war project of western academia, trying to come up with a way to say that the nazis and soviets were the same. They weren't though. Only far right US Nationalists still claim this. The term has very low analytical use, so once the pressure to create this propaganda evaporated with the end of the USSR the term quickly became defunct.

Thought terminating cliches was coined by a psychologist in ’61 trying to claim that 'totalist thought is characterized by thought terminating cliches.' To translate: the west has reasoned ideology, everyone else just spouts cliches.