I thought it might be useful to have a thread where logical fallacies can be dissected. If you see a strawman argument, a slippery slope fallacy, etc. here in P&N, post it here with links to the original thread, and explain to us why the reasoning is faulty.
a logical fallacies thread
- Thread starter aidanjm
- Start date
First example I found:
Hey, that's you! It was your post right before you started this thread. Congrats!
Originally posted by: aidanjm
I do wonder if you have a lack of outlets for expression of anger or aggression IRL, how else to explain your behavior on this forum?
Hey, that's you! It was your post right before you started this thread. Congrats!
Internet Infidels has a great resource on common fallacies used in religious debates - Here
Wikipedia, great reference much more in depth.
Wikipedia, great reference much more in depth.
Originally posted by: ShadesOfGrey
First example I found:
Originally posted by: aidanjm
I do wonder if you have a lack of outlets for expression of anger or aggression IRL, how else to explain your behavior on this forum?
Hey, that's you! It was your post right before you started this thread. Congrats!
How is that a logical fallacy? What argument am I trying to make? It's just a bit of speculation on my part, certainly not a formal argument
Also, be aware that insulting someone isn't necessarily a logical error. If I was to call you a <insert rude word>, then it's 'just' an in insult.
If I was to suggest your argument on subject X is worthless BECAUSE you are a <insert rude word>, we are moving into ad hominem fallacy territory (i.e., discredit the argument by discrediting the person making the argument) (as opposed to addressing the argument itself)Originally posted by: aidanjm
Originally posted by: ShadesOfGrey
First example I found:
Originally posted by: aidanjm
I do wonder if you have a lack of outlets for expression of anger or aggression IRL, how else to explain your behavior on this forum?
Hey, that's you! It was your post right before you started this thread. Congrats!
How is that a logical fallacy? What argument am I trying to make? It's just a bit of speculation on my part, certainly not a formal argument
Also, be aware that insulting someone isn't necessarily a logical error. If I was to call you a dipsh1t, then it's 'just' an in insult.
For one, the following from tab's link:
Originally posted by: ShadesOfGrey
Originally posted by: aidanjm
Originally posted by: ShadesOfGrey
First example I found:
Originally posted by: aidanjm
I do wonder if you have a lack of outlets for expression of anger or aggression IRL, how else to explain your behavior on this forum?
Hey, that's you! It was your post right before you started this thread. Congrats!
How is that a logical fallacy? What argument am I trying to make? It's just a bit of speculation on my part, certainly not a formal argument
Also, be aware that insulting someone isn't necessarily a logical error. If I was to call you a dipsh1t, then it's 'just' an in insult.
For one, the following from tab's link:
And what is the argument I am seeking to undermine thru personal insult?
If there's no argument, it isn't an adhominem, it's just another insult
Originally posted by: aidanjm
Originally posted by: ShadesOfGrey
Originally posted by: aidanjm
Originally posted by: ShadesOfGrey
First example I found:
Originally posted by: aidanjm
I do wonder if you have a lack of outlets for expression of anger or aggression IRL, how else to explain your behavior on this forum?
Hey, that's you! It was your post right before you started this thread. Congrats!
How is that a logical fallacy? What argument am I trying to make? It's just a bit of speculation on my part, certainly not a formal argument
Also, be aware that insulting someone isn't necessarily a logical error. If I was to call you a dipsh1t, then it's 'just' an in insult.
For one, the following from tab's link:
And what is the argument I am seeking to undermine thru personal insult?
If there's no argument, it isn't an adhominem, it's just another insult
Isn't that bait and switch, or is it calling the pot a thimble?
Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Originally posted by: aidanjm
Originally posted by: ShadesOfGrey
Originally posted by: aidanjm
Originally posted by: ShadesOfGrey
First example I found:
Originally posted by: aidanjm
I do wonder if you have a lack of outlets for expression of anger or aggression IRL, how else to explain your behavior on this forum?
Hey, that's you! It was your post right before you started this thread. Congrats!
How is that a logical fallacy? What argument am I trying to make? It's just a bit of speculation on my part, certainly not a formal argument
Also, be aware that insulting someone isn't necessarily a logical error. If I was to call you a dipsh1t, then it's 'just' an in insult.
For one, the following from tab's link:
And what is the argument I am seeking to undermine thru personal insult?
If there's no argument, it isn't an ad hominem, it's just another insult
Isn't that bait and switch, or is it calling the pot a thimble?
lots of the fallacies are a form of bait and switch
Following logical rules on the internet doesn't work because not everyone is following the same rules Whenever I see someone citing logical fallacies I think of someone who just started taking a basic logic college course and thinks naively that they could dominate discussions with them.
Anyways, disagreeing with me is a well-known logical fallacy.
Whenever I see someone citing logical fallacies I think of someone who just started taking a basic logic college course and thinks naively that they could dominate discussions with them.Anyways, disagreeing with me is a well-known logical fallacy.
if people are trying to assess the merits of a particular argument, then the use of logic (in assessing that argument) is going to be pretty much the default approach. but maybe you like to go with your gut feelings or flip a dice..?
I'm not sure that too many people draw attention to logical fallacies in order to "dominate discussions".. I think for many people it is more about highlighting the flaws or failures of an argument.
Are you an atheist, tab? this list can be cool, there are a few very smart people on it, altho there are also some very crazy people there too:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/atheistempire/
Bolded above is the fallacy that because numerous smart people think one way makes their argument appealing. 9 out of ten dentists think this is a logical fallacy.
how is my comment a logical fallacy, there is no argument present, no claim. I have no idea what you are trying to say. some of the crazy people are interesting, have interesting viewpoints. I'm semi-crazy myself, I like crazy people, freaks, but I am aware that lots of people don't.
My favorite on P&N and politics in general are the false dilemma arguments, and it seems to be the most common by far. I actually didn't know the name, but I've seen it quite a lot. In fact, a thread I started a little while ago was on that topic. The basic fallacy is that there are a limited number (usually two) of options to pick from, and if you don't pick one option, you must pick the other. This does actually work, as long as you first show that there are indeed only a limited number of options. This step is almost always implied, usually without any supporting evidence.
I don't have a direct quote (mostly because I'm too lazy to look for it), by my favorite recent example of this is "You don't support Bush's approach to the war in Iraq, you want us to pull out immediatly and let the terrorists win."
I don't have a direct quote (mostly because I'm too lazy to look for it), by my favorite recent example of this is "You don't support Bush's approach to the war in Iraq, you want us to pull out immediatly and let the terrorists win."
Dude, that's too much like homework.
Many weak or invalid arguments at P&N start with false premises (alleged statements of fact).
Dave's hybrid thread
I think hybrids are definitely part of the solution to our energy excesses but the facts are the facts. Namely, few if any hybrid vehicles have actually achieved EPA mileage in "real world" driving. Accordingly, virtually any estimate of fuel savings is suspect by a margin of 10-30%.
IGBT thread on Clinton era bin Laden issues
This one fails on multiple levels. False premises, suspect inferences, and invalid conclusions. Virtually all of the conclusions in the thread are unsupported even by the evidence presented. For good measure, IGBT even tossed in a false dichotomy.
Todd33's tribute thread to GOP hypocrisy
Although Bosnia is quite "different" from Iraq, certain premises, inferences, and conclusions share one strong link. The source of a given statement did not like Clinton's decision to intervene in Bosnia. So they established a "conclusion" . . . Clinton policy sux and then worked backwards.
Arguably, our very presence in Iraq evolved from a similar "intellectual" exercise.
A lot of misunderstanding comes from the fact that "fallacy" has a couple meanings. It can mean an idea that is just wrong or it can mean incorrectness of reasoning. Those are two distinct things. Example:
Statement: "The capital of the USA is New York."
PN poster response: That is a fallacy dude! DC is the capital of the USA.
Analysis: The original statement is incorrect. Some people would call it a fallacy. HOWEVER, it is not a mistake in reasoning or in argumentation, it's a mistake of fact. (There is an example of this kind of interpretation higher up in this thread).
Argument: "The capital of the USA is DC because most people say it is."
Analysis: Even if the conclusion is correct, there is fallacious reasoning, namely an appeal to popularity. Here, it's the reasoning that is faulty.
What aidan is getting at is the second, more useful meaning.
Statement: "The capital of the USA is New York."
PN poster response: That is a fallacy dude! DC is the capital of the USA.
Analysis: The original statement is incorrect. Some people would call it a fallacy. HOWEVER, it is not a mistake in reasoning or in argumentation, it's a mistake of fact. (There is an example of this kind of interpretation higher up in this thread).
Argument: "The capital of the USA is DC because most people say it is."
Analysis: Even if the conclusion is correct, there is fallacious reasoning, namely an appeal to popularity. Here, it's the reasoning that is faulty.
What aidan is getting at is the second, more useful meaning.
But that is a statment of fact. Bush did say on staturday that U.S. troops in Iraq were fighting to protect Americans at home from terrorism like the Sept. 11 attacks four years ago.
You might disagree with bush's statment but you do agree he said it right?
I've never really understood how people can do that, or how it becomes a Rupublican vs. Democrat War.
Whats the difference between false dilemma and false dichomoety(sp?)? Aren't they the same thing?
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 19K
-
-
-
Intel processors crashing Unreal engine games (and others)- Started by BFG10K
- Replies: 2K
Facebook
Twitter