Talk:Reductio ad Hitlerum

message: Mr. Leo Strauss (September 20, 1899 – October 18, 1973) created the term, he was a conservative and not pro the freedom of avg person. Let the truth be known so we comprehend why the term is often used to lambaste liberals and others who seek to end racism, classism, sexism.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2604:2000:DDC0:DF00:8D84:B105:5E76:F813 (talk) 05:09, 24 October 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: This is unhelpful to the page. Also, please sign your comments. Thank you! Gravestep (talk) 14:23, 30 November 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Term was created by a conservative

message: It seems to me that this is generally of the form of argument by analogy. But for argument by analogy to 'work', the two things need to be 'relevantly' similar. So when talking about Hitler, or Nazis, in relation to particular political or philosophical beliefs, the argument can be valid (in the week sense). There is also some other problem whereby the assumption is made that since a comparison to Hitler has been made, the argument MUST be invalid. Which is of course, absurd. All of this relies however on some deeper analysis of what specifics of Hitler are relevant. And that is where things can get all too grey. Certainly, for example, we could talk about elements of the Zionist movement of the 30s being like the Nazis, in 'nationalistic' fervour, group identity, paramilitary organisation etc. This argument is rather more nuanced, and relies on examining the nature of Nazism, and ultimately making another argument that the similarities are relevant and that, for example, strong group identity can lead to atrocities like the Holocaust. 103.1.7.171 (talk) 02:17, 4 October 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Great points! So we're not all stupid at all. Thanks for sharing. For a minute I thought I was the only one not sleeping in this article/feedback.--2604:2000:DDC0:DF00:8D84:B105:5E76:F813 (talk) 05:10, 24 October 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Argument by analogy 

message: The "Invocations of the fallacy" lists illustrative cases where public figures have been specifically accused of constructing an argument which uses a form of reductio ad Hitlerum. Including examples of public figures who have drawn Hitler comparisons without drawing any such criticism is WP:OR ("any analysis or synthesis of published material that serves to advance a position not advanced by the sources"), however obvious the reductio might personally seem to Wikipedia editors. --McGeddon (talk) 14:14, 1 April 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I have just deleted the Beck content for this reason. 92.10.80.23 (talk) 03:54, 8 November 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Putin examples 

message: This quote taken out of context is in general a wrong statement. I can readily imagine the context where this comparison makes sense:
(A) Start talking that liberalism is evil. (B) But why this evil is so attractive? (C) Because it lures people with promotion of healthy living, just like the statute of Hitlerjugend. 
In other way "reductio ad hitlerum" here would amount to proving that healthy living is bad. But apparently this is not what was meant.
Therefore either our definition of RaH is wrong/incomplete.  Staszek Lem (talk) 23:58, 21 January 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Can you define "healthy living", and provide an example of how "liberalism" promotes this?  Valgrus Thunderaxe (talk) 16:38, 22 September 2022 (UTC)

text: I clicked a couple ext links in the article and see it is written fundamentally diverging from sources given and must be rewritten. Staszek Lem (talk) 00:01, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

text: Reductios ad hitlerum aren't supposed to make sense. TFD (talk) 16:52, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Nazism and contemporary liberalism both promote healthy living is as meaningless  a finding"