Dictus and Locks’ comments lacked substance, grammar

Jesse Heath

If ignorance is indeed bliss, then Ben Dictus and Josh Locks must reside in a world of ecstasy that the rest of us can only dream of. After reading their articles in the last Lawrentian, I couldn’t help but notice an appalling contradiction present in each of their arguments: a childlike triumphal glee over the purported victory of their own views (or in Locks’ case, his professed lack of views), which was paralleled by a conspicuous shortfall of any factual/theoretical foundation. Also, both Dictus and Locks demonstrated a somewhat feeble command over the English language (e.g. “Iraq people” instead of Iraqi people and inappropriate/excessive use of the Caps Lock key).Though I usually make a point to read pro-war articles wherever they happen to surface, I felt duty-bound to respond to Dictus and Locks’ articles for a few reasons. First, in my view, their specific arguments and overall reasoning are indefensible. Second, these poor arguments and reasoning are also representative of the mainstream pro-war stance. Thus, by addressing their fallacies, I can at the same time address the tripe emanating from the Fox News Channel and from most of my pro-war friends and acquaintances. Though there are better arguments for the war, it appears that pro-war “folk” do not feel compelled to find and use them, probably because the current political climate in this country isn’t prone to challenging a critical assessment of the facts and as a result stifles meaningful debate.

Dictus and Locks’ articles were so disgraceful, there is no way I could refute their particular pro-war stances in only the 350 words allotted for letters. So, a full and comprehensive devastation of the arguments advanced by Dictus and Locks and many pro-war “folk” will be printed in this week’s One Minute Left as an article instead. Hopefully a careful reading of what I have to say there might clear up some of the confusion that plagues Dictus and Locks’ primitive logic.