I don't object to this blatant attempt at making me smarter, but Equivocation and Perfect Solution remind me that many of the debates around here aren't going to be debates, just conversation
cause those two read more like empathy, and even in a debate if someone is upset, i consider the upset more important than the debate. most of the other examples i thought were real good, and i can't believe the amount of work you did on this.I tend to think in style of argument-- steamroller, needle, passive-aggressive, pulling the carpet out from under you.
Steamroller is when they have gone past arguing and are just trying to 'score points' by making you look like an idiot, without resorting to obvious, crass insults.
Needle is the one who tries to puncture the argument with something unrelated to anything at all, like 'we have our own problems to deal with' implying that your very argument shouldn't be taking place, as you obviously have no sense of priority, and the debate forum should be closed, you dolt.
Thanks for getting my brain working this morning.
MiKeBoY2003 wrote:
Mods are too busy still reading it.
Statistics: Posted by Redrum Frank — October 28th, 2011, 5:06 am
]]>
Example Argument
Philus: The government should reform the tax code because the tax system is unfair to the middle class. (Initial argument)
Theopolus: Do you mean the tax code or the tax system? (Nit-Picking)
Philus: My point was that Americans in the middle class pay a substantially larger amount of money as opposed to the rich. (Countering fallacy with new and relevant information)
Along that line, I have found it is not wise to argue with the intent to turn the person you are arguing against to your side. They are often entrenched in their opinion. Even if it does change, they are not likely to acknowledge your contribution. It is better to have an invisible audience in mind.
Argue for the betterment of yourself, not others.
Statistics: Posted by Earl of March — November 5th, 2010, 5:09 pm
]]>
It gives really great examples for informal fallacies!
Statistics: Posted by Earl of March — November 5th, 2010, 4:55 pm
]]>
-Matt
Statistics: Posted by Matt — August 26th, 2010, 1:40 pm
]]>
]]>
]]>
Though I'm only one person, I can assure you I won't be the only one. A link probably would have sufficed, as it's probably copied from some website somewhere.
I still appreciate the work you put in, Kik.
Statistics: Posted by Junesetsfire — August 21st, 2010, 2:42 am
]]>
It was the clearest most concise example to illustrate the point
of how it could be misused.
Using a less exaggerated example could just result in people who
don't understand fallacies to begin with not understanding what the problem with that situation is.
Statistics: Posted by Znath — August 20th, 2010, 11:22 pm
]]>
]]>
Logic will always be 'right' by nature, that's why it's "logic".
Gotta qualify that there - it finds the optimal solution, sure, but it can't solve everything. Prisoner's dillema logic dictates to betray, but it's a logical bet of sorts that the other won't betray. If your bet turns false, you lose out more.
Statistics: Posted by Sighence — August 20th, 2010, 9:14 pm
]]>
[youtube]IO9d2PpP7tQ[/youtube]
Appeal to Emotion.
[youtube]NNv2oiWdRU[/youtube]
Appeal to Authority.
Appeal to Novelty.
Illogical arguments are effective, but it's well proper to know your fallacies.
(:
Of course, but you said logic isn't always right (in so many words). In these cases, logic is still right, those are still fallacies. I wasn't arguing that people don't use them, even to their advantage sometimes, but that doesn't make logic *wrong*, it makes the people wrong for using fallacious arguments.
Logic will always be 'right' by nature, that's why it's "logic".
Statistics: Posted by Landerpurex — August 20th, 2010, 8:25 pm
]]>
]]>
Shouldn't be stickied imo
People will just end up attempting to call out fallacies when they really aren't
Eg.
"According to my source, the sky is made of blueberries and at night they go sour"
"Your source is written by a man in an insane asylum"
"Poisoning the well and strawman fallacy!"
In the case with a list like this, a little knowledge and not knowing how to use it
could do more damage than it would help.
I love how you use an extreme example to illustrate your point in a thread partially about showing how to avoid extreme examples.
Stickied. Or rather, it would be if I could. For some reason, it doesn't give me the option.
Looks like I can't anywhere. I blame Henner. Ask an admin.
Statistics: Posted by Sighence — August 20th, 2010, 4:44 pm
]]>
[youtube]NNv2oiWdRU[/youtube]
Appeal to Authority.
Appeal to Novelty.
Illogical arguments are effective, but it's well proper to know your fallacies.
(:
Statistics: Posted by Kanye West — August 20th, 2010, 4:14 pm
]]>
]]>
And logic is always correct.
Explain to me how something could be fallacious but still be true or plausible.
I'll wait.
Statistics: Posted by Landerpurex — August 19th, 2010, 9:45 pm
]]>
Statistics: Posted by Kanye West — August 19th, 2010, 5:04 pm
]]>
People will just end up attempting to call out fallacies when they really aren't
Eg.
"According to my source, the sky is made of blueberries and at night they go sour"
"Your source is written by a man in an insane asylum"
"Poisoning the well and strawman fallacy!"
In the case with a list like this, a little knowledge and not knowing how to use it
could do more damage than it would help.
Statistics: Posted by Znath — August 19th, 2010, 3:49 pm
]]>
]]>
]]>