[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.

(:

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.

I'll ask one.

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".

__________________

Awesome Squall sprite courtesy of Goten! Check here if you'd like a runescape or game-themed sprite!

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.

YHBT

"I love how you use an extreme example to illustrate your point in a thread partially about showing how to avoid extreme examples."

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.

__________________
"The good warrior knows when to fight, and when to withdraw."
- Sun Tzu

I'll smith anything up to 93 smithing if you have the material for me to make it with
My Story, Horrors of Myron County
RV's Drawing archive topic, post yours or comment on others

tl;dr
That's coming from me who lurks the debate forum like no other.
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.

__________________
The wrath of God is unleashed in the hands of man.
This is their plans; to infect the lands,
to force everyone to meet their demands.

Mods got their glue bottle back. Stickied.

Awesome Monk, you rock.

I don't really post on RV much/at all any more, but was just taking a look at the debate forum and saw this, very comprehensive guide, nicely done

-Matt

__________________

Just found an awesome site for fallacies I thought I'd share:
http://www.vandruff.com/art_converse.html

It gives really great examples for informal fallacies!

Also, I want to add a thought. I have learned that it is best not to expose a fallacy by saying "that is" and stating the fallacy. Each fallacy has a weakness, that is what makes a fallacy a fallacy. Expose the weakness in that fallacy. For example, if someone is trying to nit-pick, keep on topic. Explain why that is an insignificant detail. This will help the audience stay interested, as well as informed instead of having to guess what you mean.

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.

only thing i have learned is i shouldn't have punched that guy who told me i was fallacious. i totally misunderstood that, ok, my bad.

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.
LMAO