Exclusive: Amazon bosses forced staff at the company's Bristol warehouse to work without access to drinking water and toilets — the latest example of the company's hyper-exploitative employment practices.
I agree with the dude about the Apple products. I think the third and fourth panels are straw man arguments.
You can choose to dislike Apple’s practices. However, if you know about their labor issues yet still buy their products, then their suffering is not important enough. You might have your reasons to get an iPhone, but no reason is going to ever nullify that you willingly understood the chain of responsibility, and elected to be a contributor to the problem.
This matters in the aspect of Apple devices because there are dozens of very reasonable hardware vendors and hundreds of phones to choose from, yet you purchased the one that you know has poor practices. It’s like living in a rural area, and buying eggs from the guy that kicks their chickens. Then complaining about it while making dinner with them.
The seat belt is a straw man argument here because car manufacturers did not cause labor problems by not having a seat belt. It was simply because the safety of seat belts were not realized, yet. This has nothing to do with labor at all, and is a silly argument.
By pretending that old cars are like Apple phones, and claiming that the argument against old cars is silly, then complaining about Apple must be silly. However, complaining about Apple is valid, and has nothing to do with old cars. This is a textbook straw man fallacy.
Then, the strip goes to volume 11 with the straw man arguments on the fourth pane by comparing improving society with Apple’s unfair labor. It assumes that you fell for the straw man fallacy about old cars, which primes you for this pane. With the rest of the strip, it implies that if you live in a society (which we all do), then you cannot complain about Apple’s labor issues. Additionally, the quip about being “very intelligent” is sarcasm, and it’s an ad hominem attack against the critical thinker: you.
You absolutely can complain about Apple’s labor issues, and you can choose to not participate in it by funding their labor. Additionally, you can still be somewhat concerned about the labor issues, but not be concerned enough to buy from other vendors. This is arguably hypocritical, but pretending that you cannot do both or have other opinions presents another fallacy: the false dichotomy fallacy.
In other words, this comic sucks. If you fell for it, then you’re simply human, and that’s okay, but please be aware that these arguments are the cornerstones of propaganda. They’re easy to fall for if you’re not looking for them, and it will make you believe in things that you wouldn’t ordinarily believe.
I agree with the dude about the Apple products. I think the third and fourth panels are straw man arguments.
You can choose to dislike Apple’s practices. However, if you know about their labor issues yet still buy their products, then their suffering is not important enough. You might have your reasons to get an iPhone, but no reason is going to ever nullify that you willingly understood the chain of responsibility, and elected to be a contributor to the problem.
This matters in the aspect of Apple devices because there are dozens of very reasonable hardware vendors and hundreds of phones to choose from, yet you purchased the one that you know has poor practices. It’s like living in a rural area, and buying eggs from the guy that kicks their chickens. Then complaining about it while making dinner with them.
The seat belt is a straw man argument here because car manufacturers did not cause labor problems by not having a seat belt. It was simply because the safety of seat belts were not realized, yet. This has nothing to do with labor at all, and is a silly argument.
By pretending that old cars are like Apple phones, and claiming that the argument against old cars is silly, then complaining about Apple must be silly. However, complaining about Apple is valid, and has nothing to do with old cars. This is a textbook straw man fallacy.
Then, the strip goes to volume 11 with the straw man arguments on the fourth pane by comparing improving society with Apple’s unfair labor. It assumes that you fell for the straw man fallacy about old cars, which primes you for this pane. With the rest of the strip, it implies that if you live in a society (which we all do), then you cannot complain about Apple’s labor issues. Additionally, the quip about being “very intelligent” is sarcasm, and it’s an ad hominem attack against the critical thinker: you.
You absolutely can complain about Apple’s labor issues, and you can choose to not participate in it by funding their labor. Additionally, you can still be somewhat concerned about the labor issues, but not be concerned enough to buy from other vendors. This is arguably hypocritical, but pretending that you cannot do both or have other opinions presents another fallacy: the false dichotomy fallacy.
In other words, this comic sucks. If you fell for it, then you’re simply human, and that’s okay, but please be aware that these arguments are the cornerstones of propaganda. They’re easy to fall for if you’re not looking for them, and it will make you believe in things that you wouldn’t ordinarily believe.