Ignore weak arguments, personal attacks

Editor, Index-Tribune:

For voters undecided about Measure B, I have a few suggestions. Weak arguments typically contain personal attacks that have nothing to do with the topic; this is called an ad hominem argument. Vote based on arguments from the people who don’t use ad hominem tactics.

Weak arguments substitute a confuse-them strategy for an internally-coherent argument. For the undecided voter, access to neutral information is critical. You’ll have to really work to get any neutral information as all of humanity is biased in one way or another.

Development issues are contentious nationwide. These same battles have been fought over and over again.

How have the same issues embodied in Measure B been resolved in Europe’s wine country or other U.S. cities?

Look up “urban planning” on Wikipedia or another encyclopedia to see how issues, particularly of sustainability, are presented.

Weak arguments rely on volume, anger, sarcasm and brute repetition of slogans. Vote against weak arguments as you see them. Try to decide on the merits of the issue, if you can find them. Bullying, argumentative tactics might be effective, but conform more to the law of club and fang.

This style only entrenches the opposition. We see this stuff enough already in national politics. Cut through that stuff. Listen to the calm voices that lay out a coherent map of the issues. Compare what people are for, what the consequences of their positive visions might be.

Fred Allebach

Sonoma