Difference between revisions of "Last wordism"
From Conservapedia
DanielPulido (Talk | contribs) |
(Section was speculation and not fact. Did not have a citation.) |
||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
When '''last wordism''' is correctly identified, it often betrays the weaknesses of "less intellectually robust presentations."<ref>http://www.cslewisinstitute.org/pages/resources/books/reviews/CaseforChrist.pdf</ref> | When '''last wordism''' is correctly identified, it often betrays the weaknesses of "less intellectually robust presentations."<ref>http://www.cslewisinstitute.org/pages/resources/books/reviews/CaseforChrist.pdf</ref> | ||
| − | |||
== References == | == References == | ||
Revision as of 16:28, 20 September 2012
Last wordism is a tactic used in a debate or discussion, resorted to in the belief that victory can be obtained by having the "last word." A statement can be identified as last wordism if it adds no new substance to an argument; it is intended to achieve its effect through recency[1] rather than through relevance.
When last wordism is correctly identified, it often betrays the weaknesses of "less intellectually robust presentations."[2]
References
- ↑ "Recency" is the state of being "recent", as in "most recent."
- ↑ http://www.cslewisinstitute.org/pages/resources/books/reviews/CaseforChrist.pdf
