"As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches 1."
This observation is frequently used to bring discussion to a halt:
http://xkcd.com/261/
One way to get around this problem is to use an alternative regime for purposes of comparison, eg. to liken the excesses of a small-town mayor to the enormities of Pol Pot. However, it since all fascist regimes are functionally analogous to Nazi Germany, shouldn't all such comparisons be subject to Godwin's Law?
Originally posted by Bosse de Nage "As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches 1."
This observation is frequently used to bring discussion to a halt:
http://xkcd.com/261/
One way to get around this problem is to use an alternative regime for purposes of comparison, eg. to liken the excesses of a small-town mayor to t ...[text shortened]... onally analogous to Nazi Germany, shouldn't all such comparisons be subject to Godwin's Law?
I think most people treat Godwin's Law as referring implicitly to all indefensible political regimes.
Originally posted by Bosse de Nage "As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches 1."
This observation is frequently used to bring discussion to a halt:
http://xkcd.com/261/
One way to get around this problem is to use an alternative regime for purposes of comparison, eg. to liken the excesses of a small-town mayor to t ...[text shortened]... onally analogous to Nazi Germany, shouldn't all such comparisons be subject to Godwin's Law?
The assumption in Godwin's law is that all comparisons to the Nazis, or Hitler, are either unjustified or overkill. It seems to me that it is most frequently invoked by people who are too lazy to deflect the comparison by other means.
Perhaps a new law is called for (Penfold's law?) which states that: As online discussions involving comparisons to Hitler grow longer, the probability of Godwin's law being invoked approaches 1.
Originally posted by rwingett The assumption in Godwin's law is that all comparisons to the Nazis, or Hitler, are either unjustified or overkill. It seems to me that it is most frequently invoked by people who are too lazy to deflect the comparison by other means.
Perhaps a new law is called for (Penfold's law?) which states that: As online discussions involving comparisons to Hitler grow longer, the probability of Godwin's law being invoked approaches 1.
Who is Penfold?
Incidentally, as anything grows longer, the possibility of all possible outcomes approaches one.
Originally posted by Bosse de Nage "As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches 1."
This observation is frequently used to bring discussion to a halt:
http://xkcd.com/261/
One way to get around this problem is to use an alternative regime for purposes of comparison, eg. to liken the excesses of a small-town mayor to t ...[text shortened]... onally analogous to Nazi Germany, shouldn't all such comparisons be subject to Godwin's Law?
From my perspecitve, Godwin's Law is a lazy man's way of deflecting any comparison to despotic regimes like the Nazis.
History should be used to learn about where we are headed, since there is nothing new under the sun. Without it, we are doomed to repeat it, as often is the case.
Originally posted by whodey From my perspecitve, Godwin's Law is a lazy man's way of deflecting any comparison to despotic regimes like the Nazis.
History should be used to learn about where we are headed, since there is nothing new under the sun. Without it, we are doomed to repeat it, as often is the case.
It's not like we actually learn anything from history anyway.
Originally posted by Bosse de Nage "As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches 1."
This observation is frequently used to bring discussion to a halt:
http://xkcd.com/261/
One way to get around this problem is to use an alternative regime for purposes of comparison, eg. to liken the excesses of a small-town mayor to t ...[text shortened]... onally analogous to Nazi Germany, shouldn't all such comparisons be subject to Godwin's Law?
I would think that as online discussion grows longer, the probability that any topic X will be brought up approaches 1. This is a version of the infinite number of monkeys hypothesis.
It would be more interesting if the probability approached 0.587 for instance - THAT would be truly fascinating.
Originally posted by whodey History should be used to learn about where we are headed, since there is nothing new under the sun. Without it, we are doomed to repeat it, as often is the case.
Is that why you compared John McCain to a Nazi for us a while back?
Godwin's Law
11 Dec '12 07:41
Back to Top