decoration decoration
Stories

GROKLAW
When you want to know more...
decoration
For layout only
Home
Archives
Site Map
Search
About Groklaw
Awards
Legal Research
Timelines
ApplevSamsung
ApplevSamsung p.2
ArchiveExplorer
Autozone
Bilski
Cases
Cast: Lawyers
Comes v. MS
Contracts/Documents
Courts
DRM
Gordon v MS
GPL
Grokdoc
HTML How To
IPI v RH
IV v. Google
Legal Docs
Lodsys
MS Litigations
MSvB&N
News Picks
Novell v. MS
Novell-MS Deal
ODF/OOXML
OOXML Appeals
OraclevGoogle
Patents
ProjectMonterey
Psystar
Quote Database
Red Hat v SCO
Salus Book
SCEA v Hotz
SCO Appeals
SCO Bankruptcy
SCO Financials
SCO Overview
SCO v IBM
SCO v Novell
SCO:Soup2Nuts
SCOsource
Sean Daly
Software Patents
Switch to Linux
Transcripts
Unix Books

Gear

Groklaw Gear

Click here to send an email to the editor of this weblog.


You won't find me on Facebook


Donate

Donate Paypal


No Legal Advice

The information on Groklaw is not intended to constitute legal advice. While Mark is a lawyer and he has asked other lawyers and law students to contribute articles, all of these articles are offered to help educate, not to provide specific legal advice. They are not your lawyers.

Here's Groklaw's comments policy.


What's New

STORIES
No new stories

COMMENTS last 48 hrs
No new comments


Sponsors

Hosting:
hosted by ibiblio

On servers donated to ibiblio by AMD.

Webmaster
Yesno | 307 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
Yesno
Authored by: stegu on Thursday, September 06 2012 @ 01:59 AM EDT
Yes, "doublespeak" and "doublethink" are advanced
forms of delusion and self-delusion that supposedly
are made possible largely through "newspeak",
according to George Orwell. He believed strongly in
the power of language and authority to control
people's thoughts, as do I.

Verbalize contradictory and provably false statements
eloquently enough, and many people will tend to
just blindly accept your stated conclusions because
it sounds as if you know what you are talking about.
Most people don't actually listen to arguments or
analyze them, they just remember the headlines of
news and the simple slogans from politicians.

The problem for Hogan is that his audience now does
not consist of people in general (like his peers in
the jury), but of people far more knowledgeable than
him in the relevant fields of technology and law.
His arguments are bad and his conclusions are wrong,
but it is good to see what he was thinking. It is
so much easier to shoot down a false argument when
you get to see the flawed reasoning behind it.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Groklaw © Copyright 2003-2013 Pamela Jones.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners.
Comments are owned by the individual posters.

PJ's articles are licensed under a Creative Commons License. ( Details )