Changes

There are three identifiable purposes in being an internet parodist.  One is juvenile; the other two are [[logical fallacy]].

There are three identifiable purposes in being an internet parodist.  One is juvenile; the other two are [[logical fallacy]].

* Some parodists find it entertaining to espouse a caricatured viewpoint with which they disagree -- particularly if they can find someone on the opposing side who mistakes them for the real thing; they can then emotionally and intellectually manipulate that person, proving to themselves that they are smart and the other person is stupid.  This behavior is analogous to the common schoolyard behavior of lying to a fellow student about something potentially believable (like "I went bowling last night,") and then laughing at them when they believe you.  The response of any adult to such behavior is, "Why shouldn't they believe you meant what you said?"  Yes, the child has proven that the other child was naive enough to take them at their word when they are in a fact a liar.  So what?

* Some parodists find it entertaining to espouse a caricatured viewpoint with which they disagree -- particularly if they can find someone on the opposing side who mistakes them for the real thing; they can then emotionally and intellectually manipulate that person, proving to themselves that they are smart and the other person is stupid.  This behavior is analogous to the common schoolyard behavior of lying to a fellow student about something potentially believable (like "I went bowling last night,") and then laughing at them when they believe you.  The response of any adult to such behavior is, "Why shouldn't they believe you meant what you said?"  Yes, the child has proven that the other child was naive enough to take them at their word when they are in a fact a liar.  So what?

* Some internet parodists seek to prove [[Poe's law]].  Poe's law (in one of its formulations) states that it is impossible to parody certain points of view without somebody mistaking the parody for the real thing.  The law as proven, however, is irrelevant to the legitimacy of the point of view itself.  The fact that some people are unable to distinguish between a genuine believer and a parodist does ''not'' prove there is no difference between the two, or that the point of view in question is somehow invalid.  On the contrary, it simply proves the well-known fact that some people will erroneously interpret the facts in any ambiguous situation.  Thus, Poe's law is not a reflection on the point of view being parodied so much as on the individuals who lack the critical thinking skills to distinguish fact from fiction.

* Some internet parodists seek to prove [[Poe]]'s law.  Poe's law (in one of its formulations) states that it is impossible to parody certain points of view without somebody mistaking the parody for the real thing.  The law as proven, however, is irrelevant to the legitimacy of the point of view itself.  The fact that some people are unable to distinguish between a genuine believer and a parodist does ''not'' prove there is no difference between the two, or that the point of view in question is somehow invalid.  On the contrary, it simply proves the well-known fact that some people will erroneously interpret the facts in any ambiguous situation.  Thus, Poe's law is not a reflection on the point of view being parodied so much as on the individuals who lack the critical thinking skills to distinguish fact from fiction.

* Some internet parodists seek to demonstrate the existence of a [[double standard]] among conservatives.  For example, a parodist might go onto a conservative forum and behave inappropriately, insulting other users while spouting traditionally conservative ideas, in an effort to prove that conservatives hold a double standard -- allowing "conservatives" to do things they would never permit liberals to do.  While such a demonstration might show that particular ''people'' hold a double standard, it would be overgeneralization to conclude that ''conservatives in general'' are hypocritical.  For that reason, parodying to prove conservatives hold a double standard is a logical fallacy.

* Some internet parodists seek to demonstrate the existence of a [[double standard]] among conservatives.  For example, a parodist might go onto a conservative forum and behave inappropriately, insulting other users while spouting traditionally conservative ideas, in an effort to prove that conservatives hold a double standard -- allowing "conservatives" to do things they would never permit liberals to do.  While such a demonstration might show that particular ''people'' hold a double standard, it would be overgeneralization to conclude that ''conservatives in general'' are hypocritical.  For that reason, parodying to prove conservatives hold a double standard is a logical fallacy.

One wonders who these parodists are, and how sad and lonely their lives must be that they invest countless hours either behaving like children or proving a meaningless law.  It is telling, however, that with only a few exceptions (such as the YouTube promotion of the film Expelled<ref> [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eaGgpGLxLQw  Beware the believers!]</ref>, which proved that Poe's Law applies to fundamentalist evolutionists as well<ref>"C'mon HH, that video is pure Terry Gilliam Python style. Its intended to be absurd, so absurd that the mockery of the academics that makes up most of the content actually ends up making fun of their adversaries (creationists).  It is a parody of the creationist criticisms of those academics!  The second funniest thing about it, however, is the people on PZs blog (and now you HH, sorry), who are convinced it is some creationist propaganda piece. http://www.skepticfriends.org/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=9780</ref>)<ref>If I'm hearing the lyrics right, this is a strong pro-science message ... This is simply not how a creationist would parody the pro-science side. Where are the farting noises?" [http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2008/03/if_you_heard_my_voice_you_know.php Pharyngula]</ref>

One wonders who these parodists are, and how sad and lonely their lives must be that they invest countless hours either behaving like children or proving a meaningless law.  It is telling, however, that with only a few exceptions (such as the YouTube promotion of the film Expelled<ref> [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eaGgpGLxLQw  Beware the believers!]</ref>, which proved that Poe's Law applies to fundamentalist evolutionists as well<ref>"C'mon HH, that video is pure Terry Gilliam Python style. Its intended to be absurd, so absurd that the mockery of the academics that makes up most of the content actually ends up making fun of their adversaries (creationists).  It is a parody of the creationist criticisms of those academics!  The second funniest thing about it, however, is the people on PZs blog (and now you HH, sorry), who are convinced it is some creationist propaganda piece. http://www.skepticfriends.org/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=9780</ref>)<ref>If I'm hearing the lyrics right, this is a strong pro-science message ... This is simply not how a creationist would parody the pro-science side. Where are the farting noises?" [http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2008/03/if_you_heard_my_voice_you_know.php Pharyngula]</ref>