Godwin's law: Difference between revisions
Reverted 1 edit by 81.107.68.65 (talk): Probably, but this isn't part of the law. (TW) |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 12: | Line 12: | ||
While falling foul of Godwin's law tends to cause the individual making the comparison to lose their argument or credibility, Godwin's law itself can be abused as a distraction, diversion or even as [[censorship]], fallaciously miscasting an opponent's argument as [[hyperbole]] when the comparisons made by the argument are actually appropriate.<ref>David Weigel, [http://www.reason.com/news/show/32944.html "Hands Off Hitler! It's time to repeal Godwin's Law"] Reason Magazine, July 14, 2005</ref> Similar criticisms of the "law" (or "at least the distorted version which purports to prohibit all comparisons to German crimes") have been made by [[Glenn Greenwald]].<ref>[[Glenn Greenwald|Greenwald, Glenn]] (2010-07-01) [http://www.salon.com/2010/07/01/godwin/ The odiousness of the distorted Godwin's Law], ''[[Salon.com]]''</ref> |
While falling foul of Godwin's law tends to cause the individual making the comparison to lose their argument or credibility, Godwin's law itself can be abused as a distraction, diversion or even as [[censorship]], fallaciously miscasting an opponent's argument as [[hyperbole]] when the comparisons made by the argument are actually appropriate.<ref>David Weigel, [http://www.reason.com/news/show/32944.html "Hands Off Hitler! It's time to repeal Godwin's Law"] Reason Magazine, July 14, 2005</ref> Similar criticisms of the "law" (or "at least the distorted version which purports to prohibit all comparisons to German crimes") have been made by [[Glenn Greenwald]].<ref>[[Glenn Greenwald|Greenwald, Glenn]] (2010-07-01) [http://www.salon.com/2010/07/01/godwin/ The odiousness of the distorted Godwin's Law], ''[[Salon.com]]''</ref> |
||
The act of referring to Hitler or Nazis on an internet messageboard is also known as 'pulling a ChiefEd' |
|||
==History== |
==History== |
||
Revision as of 22:49, 13 February 2013
Godwin's law (also known as Godwin's Rule of Nazi Analogies or Godwin's Law of Nazi Analogies[1][2]) is an argument made by Mike Godwin in 1990[2] that has become an Internet adage. It states: "As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches 1."[2][3] In other words, Godwin observed that, given enough time, in any online discussion—regardless of topic or scope—someone inevitably makes a comparison to Hitler or the Nazis.
Although in one of its early forms Godwin's law referred specifically to Usenet newsgroup discussions,[4] the law is now often applied to any threaded online discussion, such as forums, chat rooms and blog comment threads, and has been invoked for the inappropriate use of Nazi analogies in articles or speeches.[5]
Corollaries and usage
There are many corollaries to Godwin's law, some considered more canonical (by being adopted by Godwin himself)[3] than others.[1] For example, there is a tradition in many newsgroups and other Internet discussion forums that once such a comparison is made, the thread is finished and whomever mentioned the Nazis has automatically lost whatever debate was in progress. The coupling of this corollary with the initial statement of the law proves every threaded discussion to be finite in length.[6] This principle is itself frequently referred to as Godwin's law. It is considered poor form to raise such a comparison arbitrarily with the motive of ending the thread. There is a widely recognized corollary that any such ulterior-motive invocation of Godwin's law will be unsuccessful.[7]
Godwin's law applies especially to inappropriate, inordinate, or hyperbolic comparisons of other situations (or one's opponent) with Nazis. The law and its corollaries would not apply to discussions covering known mainstays of Nazi Germany such as genocide, eugenics or racial superiority, nor, more debatably, to a discussion of other totalitarian regimes or ideologies, if that was the explicit topic of conversation, since a Nazi comparison in those circumstances may be appropriate, in effect committing the fallacist's fallacy. Whether it applies to humorous use or references to oneself is open to interpretation, since this would not be a fallacious attack against a debate opponent.
While falling foul of Godwin's law tends to cause the individual making the comparison to lose their argument or credibility, Godwin's law itself can be abused as a distraction, diversion or even as censorship, fallaciously miscasting an opponent's argument as hyperbole when the comparisons made by the argument are actually appropriate.[8] Similar criticisms of the "law" (or "at least the distorted version which purports to prohibit all comparisons to German crimes") have been made by Glenn Greenwald.[9]
The act of referring to Hitler or Nazis on an internet messageboard is also known as 'pulling a ChiefEd'
History
Godwin has stated that he introduced Godwin's law in 1990 as an experiment in memetics.[2]
Godwin's law does not claim to articulate a fallacy; it is instead framed as a memetic tool to reduce the incidence of inappropriate hyperbolic comparisons. "Although deliberately framed as if it were a law of nature or of mathematics, its purpose has always been rhetorical and pedagogical: I wanted folks who glibly compared someone else to Hitler or to Nazis to think a bit harder about the Holocaust," Godwin has written.[10]
See also
Notes
- ^ a b Tim Skirvin (1999–2009). "How to post about Nazis and get away with it—the Godwin's law FAQ". Skirv's Wiki. Retrieved 2006-05-07.
{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: date format (link) - ^ a b c d Godwin, Mike (October, 1994). "Meme, Counter-meme". Wired. Retrieved 2006-03-24.
{{cite news}}: Check date values in:|date=(help) - ^ a b Godwin, Mike (January 12, 1995). "Godwin's law of Nazi Analogies (and Corollaries)". EFF.org. Electronic Frontier Foundation. pp. "Net Culture – Humor" archive section. Retrieved 2012-06-19.
- ^ Godwin, Mike (August 18, 1991). "Re: Nazis (was Re: Card's Article on Homosexuality". Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf-lovers. 1991Aug18.215029.19421@eff.org.
- ^ Ben Goldacre (16 September 2010). "Pope aligns atheists with Nazis. Bizarre. Transcript here". bengoldacre - secondary blog.
- ^ "Internet rules and laws: the top 10, from Godwin to Poe" The Daily Telegraph, 23 October 2009
- ^ Eric Raymond. "Godwin's law". The Jargon File (4.4.7). Self-published. Retrieved 2007-03-01.
- ^ David Weigel, "Hands Off Hitler! It's time to repeal Godwin's Law" Reason Magazine, July 14, 2005
- ^ Greenwald, Glenn (2010-07-01) The odiousness of the distorted Godwin's Law, Salon.com
- ^ "I Seem To Be A Verb: 18 Years of Godwin's Law". Jewcy.com. 2008-04-30. Retrieved 2010-04-16.
Further reading
- Anderson, Nate (1 September 2011). "No Nazi comparisons? Sounds like something Hitler would say!". Ars Technica. Retrieved 1 September 2011.
External links
- Godwin's law FAQ (alternate link)
- Godwin's law at the Public Domain Jargon File
- "I Seem to be a Verb"; Mike Godwin's commentary on the 18th anniversary of Godwin's law
- My Nazi Can Beat Up Your Nazi by Michael Sietzman
- "Is it ever OK to call someone a Nazi?". BBC Online. BBC News. 2010-07-14.
- Voices on Antisemitism Interview with Mike Godwin from the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum