In an internet discussion, opponents will only ever respond to your weakest point.
So don’t give an off the cuff example, because you’ll end up discussing that one thing for the rest of the thread. In fact, examples of any kind are dangerous, because real life is complex: there’ll almost always be some insignificant part of any example that doesn’t overwhelmingly illustrate your point. And again, that’s what you’ll be discussing from now on.
And, when you do, your opponents will be revelling in the non semper ergo numquam fallacy: thinking they can shoot down your argument if they can disprove any part of it, regardless of how slight the technicality.
If your opponent is reasonably antagonistic to your position, there is very little point in trying to break this law. Because this is a prisoner’s dilemma: if you discuss reasonably and your opponent follows Duncan’s Law, you will…
View original post 196 more words