"If we want to cut off funding to the Terror Mosque we must, together as a Nation, stop watching Faux Noos." --Jon Stewart
He then goes on to assert that Faux Noos is either evil or stupid for not mentioning that Alwaleed bin Talal is News Corp.'s largest shareholder.
"It’s a level of knowing obfuscation that can only come from having a heart of pure evil." –Wyatt Cenac
Skewering them with logic = debate. Skewering them with their own logic = brilliant satire!
Watch the segment here: http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/mon-august-23-2010/the-parent-company-trap
Two problems here that I see... most people don't fully comprehend logic OR satire all the time - or even some of the time (I number myself among them) - and satire sometimes doesn't come across well in writing. (Brilliant satirists can do this - I don't count them in very high numbers, however.)
ReplyDeleteSo does this mean we're left with "our" logic alone when wishing to debate? Or does satire also count as a debate style/tool/weapon? And is satire limited to the skewer-ization of "their" logic?
Since too much of what I read lacks/hear "logic" (in all senses of the word), that would then limit opportunities to engage in satire, wouldn't it? And if you or I must always develops "logic/s" in order to "debate", that may be too limiting, too.
Besides, it's tough to use logic against the utterly ludicrous...
Satire, irony, etc., are sometimes in the eye/ear of the beholder... As for logic? As I said, perhaps absent, misused, abused or unrecognized?
Maybe this means we're back to swords and dueling pistols... Sigh... and I don't own either weapon.
The top story tonight, my weekend… How could you not laugh at the money trial logic (if A = B, and B= C, then A=C) and the way John Oliver and Wyatt Cenac highlighted the questionable intelligence of some Fox newscasters? Leave it to Jon to flip a serious topic to nonsensical humor. Very funny.
ReplyDelete