Jump to content

Gish gallop: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
mNo edit summary
Nereds to be properly sourced. None of those sources mention any counter by focusing on “eating the cats”
(30 intermediate revisions by 20 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Short description|Rhetorical technique}}
{{Short description|Rhetorical technique}}
{{use dmy dates |date=February 2023}}The '''Gish gallop''' ({{IPAc-en|'|g|ɪ|ʃ|_|'|g|æ|l|ə|p}}) is a [[Rhetoric|rhetorical]] technique in which a person in a [[debate]] attempts to overwhelm an opponent by presenting an excessive number of arguments, with no regard for their accuracy or strength, with a rapidity that makes it impossible for the opponent to address them in the time available. Gish galloping prioritizes the quantity of the galloper's arguments at the expense of their quality.
{{use dmy dates |date=February 2023}}

The '''Gish gallop''' ({{IPAc-en|'|g|ɪ|ʃ|_|'|g|æ|l|ə|p}}) is a [[Rhetoric|rhetorical]] technique in which a person in a [[debate]] attempts to overwhelm their opponent by providing an excessive number of arguments with no regard for the accuracy or strength of those arguments. Gish galloping prioritizes the quantity of the galloper's arguments at the expense of their quality. The term was coined in 1994 by anthropologist [[Eugenie Scott]], who named it after American creationist [[Duane Gish]] and argued that Gish used the technique frequently when challenging the [[Evolution as fact and theory|scientific fact of evolution]].{{sfnm|Scott|2004|1p=23|Scott|1994}}
== Origin of the term ==
The term "Gish gallop" was coined in 1994 by the anthropologist [[Eugenie Scott]] who named it for the American [[Creationism|creationist]] [[Duane Gish]], dubbed the technique's "most avid practitioner".{{sfnm|Scott|2004|1p=23|Scott|1994}}


== Strategy ==
== Strategy ==
During a Gish gallop, a debater confronts an opponent with a rapid series of specious arguments, [[half-truths]], misrepresentations, and outright lies in a short space of time, which makes it impossible for the opponent to refute all of them within the format of a formal debate.{{sfnm|Logan|2000|1p=4|Sonleitner|2004}} Each point raised by the Gish galloper takes considerably more time to refute or fact-check than it did to state in the first place, which is known online as [[Brandolini's law]].{{sfn|Hayward|2015|p=67}} The technique wastes an opponent's time and may cast doubt on the opponent's debating ability for an audience unfamiliar with the technique, especially if no independent [[fact-checking]] is involved or if the audience has limited knowledge of the topics.{{sfn|Grant|2011|p=74}}
During a typical Gish gallop, the galloper confronts an opponent with a rapid series of specious arguments, [[half-truths]], misrepresentations and outright lies, making it impossible for the opponent to refute all of them within the format of the debate.{{sfnm|Logan|2000|1p=4|Sonleitner|2004}} Each point raised by the Gish galloper takes considerably longer to refute than to assert. The technique wastes an opponent's time and may cast doubt on the opponent's debating ability for an audience unfamiliar with the technique, especially if no independent [[fact-checking]] is involved, or if the audience has limited knowledge of the topics.{{sfn|Grant|2011|p=74}}

The difference in effort between making claims and refuting them is known online as [[Brandolini's law]]{{sfn|Hayward|2015|p=67}} and is sometimes referred to as "the bullshit asymmetry principle". The element of the technique also is referred to as spewing a [[Firehose of falsehood|firehose of falsehoods]].


== Countering the Gish gallop ==
== Countering the Gish gallop ==
[[Mehdi Hasan]], a [[Mass media in the United Kingdom|British journalist]], suggests using three steps to beat the Gish gallop:<ref>{{cite podcast|first=Mehdi|last=Hasan|url=https://cafe.com/stay-tuned/debating-101-with-mehdi-hasan/|title=Stay Tuned with Preet, Debating 101|date=March 16, 2023}}</ref>
Generally, it is more difficult to use the Gish gallop in a structured debate than a free-form one.{{sfn|Johnson|2017|pp=14–15}} If a debater is familiar with an opponent who is known to use the Gish gallop, the technique may be countered by pre-empting and refuting the opponent's commonly used arguments before the opponent has an opportunity to launch into a Gish gallop.{{sfn|Grant|2015|p=55}}


# Because there are too many falsehoods to address, it is wise to choose one as an example. Choose the weakest, dumbest, most ludicrous argument that the galloper has presented and tear that argument to shreds ("the weak point rebuttal").
British journalist [[Mehdi Hasan]] suggests using these three steps to beat the Gish gallop:<ref>{{cite podcast|first=Mehdi|last=Hasan|url=https://cafe.com/stay-tuned/debating-101-with-mehdi-hasan/|title=Stay Tuned with Preet, Debating 101|date=March 16, 2023}}</ref>
# Do not budge from the issue or move on until having decisively destroyed the nonsense and clearly made the counter point.
# Call out the strategy by name, saying: "This is a strategy called the 'Gish Gallop'—do not be fooled by the flood of nonsense you have just heard."


Generally, it is more difficult to use the Gish gallop in a structured debate than a free-form one.{{sfn|Johnson|2017|pp=14–15}} If a debater is familiar with an opponent who is known to use the Gish gallop, the technique may be countered by pre-empting and refuting the opponent's commonly used arguments before the opponent has an opportunity to launch into the Gish gallop.{{sfn|Grant|2015|p=55}}
# Because there are too many falsehoods to address, it is wise to choose one as an example. Choose the weakest, dumbest, most ludicrous argument that your opponent has presented and tear this argument to shreds (also known as the weak point rebuttal).

# Do not budge from the issue. Don't move on until you have decisively destroyed the nonsense and clearly made your point.
[[Richard Nixon]] used [[George McGovern]]’s multiple positions against him, choosing to debate the legalization of cannabis.<ref>{{cite book|first=Edward N. |last=Costikyan|title=How to Win Votes: The Politics of Nineteen Eighty |publisher=Harcourt |year=1980| isbn=9780151422210}}</ref>
# Call it out: name the strategy. "This is a strategy called the 'Gish Gallop'. Do not be fooled by the flood of nonsense you have just heard."


== See also ==
== See also ==
* {{Annotated link|Ad hominem attack}}
* {{Annotated link|Brandolini's law}}
* {{Annotated link|Brandolini's law}}
* {{Annotated link|Filibuster}}
* {{Annotated link|Filibuster}}
Line 21: Line 28:
* {{Annotated link|Proof by intimidation}}
* {{Annotated link|Proof by intimidation}}
* {{Annotated link|Sealioning}}
* {{Annotated link|Sealioning}}
* {{Annotated link|Signal-to-noise ratio}}
* {{Annotated link|Spreading (debate)|Spreading}}
* {{Annotated link|Spreading (debate)|Spreading}}


Line 37: Line 43:
* {{Cite web |last=Scott |first=Eugenie |author-link=Eugenie Scott |date=1994 |title=Debates and the Globetrotters |url=http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/debating/globetrotters.html |publisher=[[Talk Origins Archive]] |access-date=2017-10-06}}
* {{Cite web |last=Scott |first=Eugenie |author-link=Eugenie Scott |date=1994 |title=Debates and the Globetrotters |url=http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/debating/globetrotters.html |publisher=[[Talk Origins Archive]] |access-date=2017-10-06}}
* {{Cite web |last=Hasan|first=Medhi |author-link=Medhi Hasan |date=2023 |title=How to Beat Trump in a Debate |website=[[The Atlantic]] |url=https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2023/02/donald-trump-debate-strategy-gish-gallop/673061/ |access-date=2023-02-16}}
* {{Cite web |last=Hasan|first=Medhi |author-link=Medhi Hasan |date=2023 |title=How to Beat Trump in a Debate |website=[[The Atlantic]] |url=https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2023/02/donald-trump-debate-strategy-gish-gallop/673061/ |access-date=2023-02-16}}
* [[Heather Cox Richardson|Richardson, Heather Cox]], ''[https://open.substack.com/pub/heathercoxrichardson/p/june-27-2024 June 27, 2024]'', Letters from an American, June 28, 2024

{{propaganda}}
{{propaganda}}


Line 43: Line 50:
[[Category:Informal fallacies]]
[[Category:Informal fallacies]]
[[Category:Rhetorical techniques]]
[[Category:Rhetorical techniques]]
[[Category:Propaganda techniques]]

Revision as of 07:02, 16 September 2024

The Gish gallop (/ˈɡɪʃ ˈɡæləp/) is a rhetorical technique in which a person in a debate attempts to overwhelm an opponent by presenting an excessive number of arguments, with no regard for their accuracy or strength, with a rapidity that makes it impossible for the opponent to address them in the time available. Gish galloping prioritizes the quantity of the galloper's arguments at the expense of their quality.

Origin of the term

The term "Gish gallop" was coined in 1994 by the anthropologist Eugenie Scott who named it for the American creationist Duane Gish, dubbed the technique's "most avid practitioner".[1]

Strategy

During a typical Gish gallop, the galloper confronts an opponent with a rapid series of specious arguments, half-truths, misrepresentations and outright lies, making it impossible for the opponent to refute all of them within the format of the debate.[2] Each point raised by the Gish galloper takes considerably longer to refute than to assert. The technique wastes an opponent's time and may cast doubt on the opponent's debating ability for an audience unfamiliar with the technique, especially if no independent fact-checking is involved, or if the audience has limited knowledge of the topics.[3]

The difference in effort between making claims and refuting them is known online as Brandolini's law[4] and is sometimes referred to as "the bullshit asymmetry principle". The element of the technique also is referred to as spewing a firehose of falsehoods.

Countering the Gish gallop

Mehdi Hasan, a British journalist, suggests using three steps to beat the Gish gallop:[5]

  1. Because there are too many falsehoods to address, it is wise to choose one as an example. Choose the weakest, dumbest, most ludicrous argument that the galloper has presented and tear that argument to shreds ("the weak point rebuttal").
  2. Do not budge from the issue or move on until having decisively destroyed the nonsense and clearly made the counter point.
  3. Call out the strategy by name, saying: "This is a strategy called the 'Gish Gallop'—do not be fooled by the flood of nonsense you have just heard."

Generally, it is more difficult to use the Gish gallop in a structured debate than a free-form one.[6] If a debater is familiar with an opponent who is known to use the Gish gallop, the technique may be countered by pre-empting and refuting the opponent's commonly used arguments before the opponent has an opportunity to launch into the Gish gallop.[7]

Richard Nixon used George McGovern’s multiple positions against him, choosing to debate the legalization of cannabis.[8]

See also

References

  1. ^ Scott 2004, p. 23; Scott 1994.
  2. ^ Logan 2000, p. 4; Sonleitner 2004.
  3. ^ Grant 2011, p. 74.
  4. ^ Hayward 2015, p. 67.
  5. ^ Hasan, Mehdi (16 March 2023). "Stay Tuned with Preet, Debating 101" (Podcast).
  6. ^ Johnson 2017, pp. 14–15.
  7. ^ Grant 2015, p. 55.
  8. ^ Costikyan, Edward N. (1980). How to Win Votes: The Politics of Nineteen Eighty. Harcourt. ISBN 9780151422210.

General and cited sources