Beware of "Well Poisoning" - Trick 101.

This is just a sharing session.

We hear many debates on ATS on issues that tend to divide, to the extent of tearing apart individuals with originally similar shared core values rendering them standing on opposite sides of the fence - sometimes, also taking too extreme a viewpoint that tend to defeat the real message(s).
Little do they realize that there is something called "poisoning the well" at work and there is a probable chance they need to "detoxify".

"Poisoning the well (or attempting to poison the well) is a rhetorical device where adverse information about a target is pre-emptively presented to an audience, with the intention of discrediting or ridiculing everything that the target person is about to say."

Wiki Link

The play to this trick is simple:
To most "simple" minds, any information (or expert) that backs up a theory should supposedly be true or without blemishes. If some of these information or part thereof is false/questionable, then the carried theory must be false, hence all original even though credible information behind it, must also be deemed false too. By process of elimination, the opposing theory must be true. The conquerors/well-poisoners have thus won.
It is this weakness in human "logic" that is easily exploited by those more powerful....tarnishing someone image or a piece of information to disqualify the underlying truth.

Identifying a well poison can sometimes be a difficult as distilling the entire well.. One truly needs a degree of critical thinking to avoid falling onto the wrong side of the equation.

Some well poisons are easily identifiable because they are easily proven wrong and most repeatedly highlighted to attack the entire well. Before a poison is poured, the perpetrator, if smart, will not allow one that will soil their hands as that might inadvertently poison themselves even more.

Personally, I always return to the basic questions and try not to get bogged down with or defend dodgy sources/details to maintain clarity if I sense something is clouding it. Often people with proven track records (and faces) who have more to lose than gain from their findings do get my attention, but I still tend to stand on the fence until truly satisfied. Even satisfied there is always a margin of error. So to believe or not to believe...?? The important lesson is to detach our sense of self or ego from the piece of information. It helps in clearing our perspective, returning to the core, avoiding the pitfall of being tools to pass the poison to neighboring wells

Last, but not least, take this post with a grain of salt. I might be poisoning your mind. There is no going back to your old "simple" self once the damage is done.

Meh, you yourself tainted the well with the sentence "To most simple minds, ..." - at that moment any reader would really, really hard try to wish them into the more intelligent crowd..

Therefore, the whole text was poisened.

Originally posted by ManFromEurope
Meh, you yourself tainted the well with the sentence "To most simple minds, ..." - at that moment any reader would really, really hard try to wish them into the more intelligent crowd..

Therefore, the whole text was poisened.

Looking for blemishes already, are we?

Yes, it's in quotation marks. So decipher it as you will. Thanks for highlighting.

Originally posted by Kurius

"Poisoning the well (or attempting to poison the well) is a rhetorical device where adverse information about a target is pre-emptively presented to an audience, with the intention of discrediting or ridiculing everything that the target person is about to say."

I think I understand.
Its like in GMO food threads where a poster is said to be an employee of Monsanto. Or where it is mentioned that Monsanto made "agent orange" all those decades ago. Or where somebody brings up the "Monsanto Act".

...as if any of those points actually provided evidence for or against the safety of the GMO food.

Originally posted by alfa1

Originally posted by Kurius

"Poisoning the well (or attempting to poison the well) is a rhetorical device where adverse information about a target is pre-emptively presented to an audience, with the intention of discrediting or ridiculing everything that the target person is about to say."

I think I understand.
Its like in GMO food threads where a poster is said to be an employee of Monsanto. Or where it is mentioned that Monsanto made "agent orange" all those decades ago. Or where somebody brings up the "Monsanto Act".

...as if any of those points actually provided evidence for or against the safety of the GMO food.

I am standing on the fence on those kinds of information, despite that they are easily "verifiable" or "debunk-able" (giving them a high probability of being a "poison" if debunked).

And you are absolutely right, they don't lend to the credibility of GMO food being safe (or unsafe). Although, I do have my strong apprehensions due to points I have highlighted in other threads (which shall not be discussed here). We do not want it to be another GMO discussion here.

Of course that are many more delusion logic arguments.

Click the link in my signature to find out.

Originally posted by PhoenixOD
Of course that are many more delusion logic arguments.

Click the link in my signature to find out.

you do know that there would be hardly any posts on ATS, if all of your "delusion logic arguments" posted in your signature, were adhered to.... "logic" is a combination of critical thinking and knowledge. taking one away, or having it distorted, creates the delusion. the problem with what's in your signature is that almost any segment of an argument can be found there. as with everything in life, it boils down to who and what does a person trust.

reply to post by jimmyx


Yes i agree there are lot of people using very bad arguments to try to persuade people into believing many things on ATS.

No i do not agree that there is a delusional logic category for every single argument every made. Only for most of the bad ones.

Originally posted by PhoenixOD
Of course that are many more delusion logic arguments.

Click the link in my signature to find out.

Thanks. And I like the humor in some of them too.