You may want to refresh your knowledge of rhetorics too, in addition to your basic mechanics. A reductio ad absurdum is quite different from the poor attempt at an argument you had made. Hint: The reductio is also known as a proof by contradiction, and is not typically listed as one of the classic devices of rhetoric.ScienceIsCool said:It's a tool of rhetoric called 'reductio ad absurdum'
So you are saying that the semantics, in other words the meaning, of your argument is irrelevant? That certainly explains a lot...ScienceIsCool said:I was using it to draw attention to the fact that it is quite ridiculous to ignore the main point of the argument and focus on an entirely insignificant, semantic side issue.
Anyway, what prompted my response was your trying to ridicule the notion of different frames having noticeably different ride quality, among other things because of differences in vertical compliance, by putting forward the ludicrous notion of a bicycle frame as a "rigid truss structure". You responded with an even sillier comparison of the effect of vertical compliance in a bicycle frame to effects that are many, many orders of magnitude smaller than what we are talking about. By the way, "hyperbole" was the rhetoric device you were looking for.
That may or may not be the case. You may have noticed, however, that even for high-end sports equipment performance is not the only relevant factor.ScienceIsCool said:I believe that manufacturers have added stiffness to that list as an easily understood differentiator and not because there are any performance benefits.