Appeal: motte-and-bailey
From FULL SAVAGE DEBATE: Jay Dyer Vs Indiana Brunner: Protestant Bible Wrong???.
- #60750:08upheld Indiana Brunner psogos: motte-and-bailey (+1)
The council upheld the call: Indiana Brunner gave away 1 point.
“… most of them were closer to the pros and cons [Protestant canon] ... No. I I never... I didn't say they were exactly…”
Diogenes: He asserts a strong historical claim about the early canon lists and, when offered a walk-through of the actual lists, retreats to a weaker one he had not stated, then admits he has not studied the sources.- Aristotle uphold: On the record: S1's standing method is to demand explicit apostolic/textual grounding before accepting a doctrinal or historical claim; here he instead advances his own strong, unsupported comparative claim about the canon lists, and when Jay offers to walk through the actual sources, retreats to a much weaker claim he denies having made, rather than defending or conceding the original one. The transcript shows the pattern plainly: Brunner asserts the substantive claim that "most of them were closer to the pros[testant] canon," and when Jay offers concrete lists to test that claim, Brunner retreats to the trivial and different claim "I never said they were exactly," which is not what he had asserted; he never returns to defend or concede the original comparative claim, and the subsequent walk-through (Cyril lacking Revelation, including Baruch, etc.) shows the original claim was in fact false.
- Socrates uphold: Read blind, found "hasty generalisation", on the same ledger as the callout. Brunner asserts, from a vague "funny enough" recollection and without naming a single list, that "most of them were closer to the Protestant canon" among the pre-fourth-century lists. When Dyer offers to walk through specifics and does (Apostolic Canon 85, which includes the deuterocanon), Brunner immediately retreats to "I didn't say they were exactly," softening the sweeping claim rather than producing the evidence for it or conceding it was wrong.
- Plato uphold: On the record: S1 has held since the canon exchange began that pre-fourth-century lists support a leaner canon; here he first asserts the strong claim that "most of them were closer to the Protestant canon," and when Jay offers to walk through the actual lists, he retreats to "I never said they were exactly," a materially weaker claim not previously stated. The transcript shows the pattern plainly: a bold historical claim offered without support, followed by an immediate retreat to a hedged, harder-to-refute version the moment specific evidence is demanded, which is the bailey-to-motte shift the label names; it is minor since Brunner goes on to name actual church fathers (Athanasius, Jerome, Cyril) rather than abandoning the exchange.
Appeal this callout
Appeals come only from the debaters themselves. Sign in with Google to start; you'll then prove which debater you are, once.