With the activation of social media including Facebook, WhatsApp, Instagram, Twitter, and Telegram, the cyber world is enriched by the writers who will bring the sword to light. While good and positive things are rarely discussed, cybersecurity is often overlooked in political and racial interactions with anti-intellectualism. Under this, efforts are being made to create a politically, religiously, socially, and socially polarized and systematic plan. It is more correct to say that at least some people have embraced the kind of relativism that seeks to impose on others what is right and wrong.
In line with this, a small minority of cyberseats have a tendency to publicly undermine religious institutions and monasteries that follow legitimate frameworks. Neither the religious nor the religious frameworks, and the conflicts they inflict on them upset even a small section of the public and the social sphere. It is difficult and impossible to convince those who pass by such criticisms, even the virtues of directing and leading such systematic systems.
What would they call them prophets of evil, who are more likely to focus on less than good in man and consequently society? Instead of appreciating the virtues and virtues that society has forged, they are mentally trapped in the mountains of even the smallest mistakes. More than encouraging such people and movement, when a person or movement is doing nothing but making a profit, and sincerely trying on his own feet, they find their flaws, reinforcing their actions of justifying and justifying what they believe is the right thing to do.
Call these kinds of arguments and arguments in general; It is called the Straw Man Argument. They will try to keep someone or the movement in the enemy, through aggressive attempts and persistent criticism, with the help of like-minded people to assert that their arguments are correct and that the opponent’s folly.
Their goal is to push people back to the subconscious by repeatedly claiming that they are on the side of what is right and that they are right. Thus, beyond the critical thinking or understanding of “enemy” arguments, they have the potential to create confusion in people by using such logical misunderstandings.
No matter how hard you try, it may not always be possible. It can be defined as a Strawman Argument or Fallacy. They will not hesitate to glorify their opponent in any way to strengthen his argument, as he says, “Put it to himself.” Not only that; Rather than their arguments, they prefer to humiliate their opponent in public. These men, through social media, are uprooted in the good work of the community and the church, defying spiritual leadership and the church’s framework and endeavoring to produce the fruit of the bulls when they hear the bull.
At the same time, the people and movements they consider to be the opponent, the arguments they make, and the good they do, are further complicated in a way that they do not intend; Increase planning and create awareness among other viewers.
Not only that we cannot resist such strong arguments; They will naturally succeed in making coincidences that seem to contradict the arguments we made before ourselves. At the very least, we can justify ourselves and put ourselves at the forefront of resistance.
These straw men and their arguments have become a cyber complexity of the spiritual leadership, the religious leaders, and their movements that lead the acts of mercy and those who indulge in such activities individually. It is not the skin itself that needs to be tripped up, but it is used to reinforce their arguments. Rather it is a cure for mental illness.