Introducing the shitman

We've all heard of Strawmanning an argument, where you portray a weakened version of the topic then argue against that, giving the false impression that you have 'proven the argument wrong.'

There's also Steelmanning, where you deliberately form the strongest case for a topic you oppose, the idea being that if you have shown that to be incorrect then you're on the right path. Once you hear about steelmanning it becomes self-evident why it is such a sensible, powerful and important thing to do.

Following an exhaustive 5 second google search, I lay claim to the word 'Shitmanning.' (Ilija Minic, March 23, 2019) That is where you assume the role of the most corrupt, malevolent, vindictive, bigoted person you can conceive and then form your argument from that basis. Do everything in your power, no matter how illogical, irrational, sneaky, dirty and flawed your tactics are, to portray your version of the argument in the best possible light. Work out how to deflect, obfuscate, and even just straight up lie about all arguments against your view in any and every way that youcan. Muddy the waters, attack the person, engage in as many logical fallacies you can get away with. It is critical to remember that you will have to get away with it so you can't be too blatant either.

The reason for this, like the steelman, should now be obvious.Regardless of how clear the meaning of something between you and me, it isn't about you. It isn't about me, it isn't about the echo chambers (tunnels actually, but still) we inhabit. It's about the small but not insignificant percentage of people who are on the verge of becoming supporters of truly shitty ideas. If we want them to have less supporters we have to stop creating the environment where they are getting more supporters.