Talk:Thought-terminating cliché

Skip to table of contents

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Thought-terminating cliché article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1: 90 days

This page is not a forum for general discussion about Thought-terminating cliché. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article. You may wish to ask factual questions about Thought-terminating cliché at the Reference desk.

This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.

If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.

Linguistics Low‑importance

	Linguistics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Linguistics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of linguistics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LinguisticsWikipedia:WikiProject LinguisticsTemplate:WikiProject LinguisticsLinguistics articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Marketing & Advertising Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Marketing & Advertising, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Marketing on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Marketing & AdvertisingWikipedia:WikiProject Marketing & AdvertisingTemplate:WikiProject Marketing & AdvertisingMarketing & Advertising articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.

The following references may be useful when improving this article in the future:

Stig Abell on... clichés. The Times.

Locked behind a paywall, subscription required.
Google search result briefly previews the author reference thought-terminating cliché's.

12 years after mocking Al Gore’s fight against climate change, South Park reconsiders. Vox

Quote on the article mentions that the show South Park provides their audience:

"...with an endless buffet of thought-terminating cliches suitable for shutting down all manner of challenges to their comfort zones."

It's only fake-believe: how to deal with a conspiracy theorist. The Guardian.

Provides a definition and an example of a cliché:

"He was sceptical. “You can prove anything with data,” he told me. “It’s all lies, damned lies and statistics.” This is known as a thought-terminating cliche..."

I’m a PhD student, and I can’t wait to vote for Donald Trump. Vox.

Provides an example of a cliché:

"The only thought-terminating cliché more infuriating than "doing the jobs Americans won't" is "that's not who we are...""

Getting Rid of 8chan Isn't Going to Get Rid of QAnon. Vice

Describes how QAnon would spin new conspiracy theories with cliché's within their framework, along with a quick example:

"Even if Q went dark, they would still spin new conspiracy theories with the framework and thought-terminating cliches (like 'trust the plan') that Q has provided them."

Toxic positivity and the thought-terminating cliché. Medium.

A detailed article discussing what they are, how they work, references sources, and includes examples.
Interestingly, this article also explores how thought stopping techniques can be used for good.

.

Maybe this is a poor source? See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reliable_sources#Questionable_and_self-published_sources

The source after where it says "Historical personalities listed to also have used such clichés include Joseph Stalin of Soviet-Russia, Ruhollah Khomeini of the Iranian Revolution, Pol Pot of the former communist country Democratic Kampuchea and Mao Zedong of the Communist Party of China."

First off, that doesn't really contribute much useful information to the article; maybe say some of the ways they used Thought-terminating clichés instead of just a simple list of a few people?

Also, idk about this idea chief: "ADVERTISING AND THE SPREAD OF BUSINESS, DEMOCRACY AND KNOWLEDGE, demonstrates that advertisements benefit both industry, corporations, democracy and spread freedoms." - from the lulu book summary accessed 7/12/2021

Maybe not fully remove https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Thought-terminating_clich%C3%A9&oldid=1028079504 ?

It seems perfectly valid to say that some people do use the label of conspiracy theory as a TTC. Even relatively commonly accepted ideas can get dismissed as conspiracy by some people sometimes, which in that use is definitely a thought-terminating cliché. This is also not a matter of political opinion here either, as the person who undid that edit stated. Political ideas aren't the only kinds of ideas that can be dismissed as conspiracy by someone as a TTC.

"End of"

I'd suggest the Britishism of ending an argument with "end of" as an example of this. Although I don't know if it is really a "cliche" but it is a kind of "punctuation" intended to terminate any debate.

"Examples" section is questionable.

The sources are opinion pieces, which means I can't use the "essay" tag as the editor is not sharing their own opinions, and is clearly citing sources in good faith. However, I question whether the section provides objective and helpful information. I have opted for the "tone" tag and I hope that is accurate.

Example: "It's all good." My personal opinion aside, this is a political opinion piece from Medium and no more reliable than a well-written Reddit comment. The author does not have credentials listed and appears to be a blogger or content writer. Additionally, I don't think this is a helpful example ad the phrase is more in the realm of social niceties than argumentative rhetoric. "No prob" could be similarly analyzed but to do so would be silly.

Second example: "Lies of the devil." Unless the article wants to delve into the use of TECs in religion, this is just confusing. It's not a widely used idiom, more of a concept, and someone unfamiliar with the subject wouldn't understand how this fits.

I think we should limit the article to a few highly exemplary, well-sourced phrases which are clearly obstructive, established as clichés, and preferably derived from the defining source material. 2603:7081:1603:A300:1141:BDAB:9C4E:6D99 (talk) 16:59, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have added the "It's complicated" cliche, which is notable for the accusation of gatekeeping and ending conversations related to the Israel-Palestine conflict.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:646:8d01:c650:e4a7:7141:1b26:ef16 (talk) 15:14, 1 June (UTC)

Original research

I have a suspicion that part of the article is dubious original research. The lede say: "They only become so when used to intentionally dismiss dissent or justify fallacious logic." Meaning this article should specifically employ references which discuss the use of cliches as a demagogical trick. Take any taboo as an example. Some subjects may be forbidden to discuss for cultural or religious reasons. But it does not give a Wikipedian right to declare that some taboo is a TTC.

Therefore I will review whether the refs cited do indeed discuss the cases of actual "discussion blockers". --Altenmann >talk 20:22, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]