The argument style "I am not sexist/racist/etc. but..." has always amused me. Most of the time, the person using it, is actually not sexist/racist/etc. and are just trying to express their opinion about a subject. The reason these people include the "I am not ____, but..." intro, is because their opinion could seem to be hateful when that is not their intention.
These people are fine. I have done this a few times, and the reason I do it is to reassure people that I am not a hateful douche ranting about something. As I am sure you know, there are many touchy subjects that can break out into flame wars if you are not careful.
The other group of people using this argument intro are using it to deliberately throw up a flame shield to protect them from the people who have a problem with their argument. Of the times I have seen this, it seems about 50% accidental, 50% intentional. The accidental cases are usually a flaw in logic, or not tempering their argument well enough to fit into a social forum. These accidental offenders usually fix their mistakes quickly so a rational argument can be carried out and their position discussed. An example of this, was a time a few weeks ago in my Philosophy clads where a guy said "I don't hate kids, but I don't understand people who like them". His logical flaw, was assuming that we all knew what he meant (he meant 14-18 year olds that he finds "annoying as shit"). The intential cases are just jerks using it to cover their asses. These people will use the "I don't hate X, but..." as a defense to fall back on when people call them out for being a dick. The most notable case I can think about for this one, was where a guy said he wasn't sexist, but then went on to say men were physically superior to women in every way...
To sum up, this argument function is useful for setting up well thought arguments about touchy subjects, but if used wrong, you'll do the opposite and just look like a dick.
So, for discussion value, what are some "I don't hate "this", but..." cases that you have seen? What ones have you used?
Feel free to discuss any actual positions brought up, but I want to focus on this logical function rather than any positions someone may have.
These people are fine. I have done this a few times, and the reason I do it is to reassure people that I am not a hateful douche ranting about something. As I am sure you know, there are many touchy subjects that can break out into flame wars if you are not careful.
The other group of people using this argument intro are using it to deliberately throw up a flame shield to protect them from the people who have a problem with their argument. Of the times I have seen this, it seems about 50% accidental, 50% intentional. The accidental cases are usually a flaw in logic, or not tempering their argument well enough to fit into a social forum. These accidental offenders usually fix their mistakes quickly so a rational argument can be carried out and their position discussed. An example of this, was a time a few weeks ago in my Philosophy clads where a guy said "I don't hate kids, but I don't understand people who like them". His logical flaw, was assuming that we all knew what he meant (he meant 14-18 year olds that he finds "annoying as shit"). The intential cases are just jerks using it to cover their asses. These people will use the "I don't hate X, but..." as a defense to fall back on when people call them out for being a dick. The most notable case I can think about for this one, was where a guy said he wasn't sexist, but then went on to say men were physically superior to women in every way...
To sum up, this argument function is useful for setting up well thought arguments about touchy subjects, but if used wrong, you'll do the opposite and just look like a dick.
So, for discussion value, what are some "I don't hate "this", but..." cases that you have seen? What ones have you used?
Feel free to discuss any actual positions brought up, but I want to focus on this logical function rather than any positions someone may have.