New vid: argument from ignorance explained through mining

[robvalue]

I'm sorry if I misinterpreted. I'm afraid I can't follow your posts or your thinking very well at all, I do my best. I don't mean to strawman you.

So you did give that impression, it's just I was mistaken in taking that impression.

[Mystic]

I read the implication because it was otherwise an entirely pointless thing to say.

It's not pointless. In a discussion seeking to mutually understand each other, we should come to agreement on what we both agree upon and what disagree upon. I haven't made any argument really for God or for religion yet in that thread. You've made anti-religion arguments, but I've shown, I don't take your assumptions you basing them on for granted. I come with a different view point but I don't have to yet show your view point is false, to refute it. I simply showing a perspective I have that disagrees with what you are stating. You haven't show your viewpoint correct and I never called you out on it. This while you keep calling me out while I haven't made an argument for God/Islam as of yet on the thread claiming it proves I am right.

[Edwardo Piet]

Wow, thanks Evie! It kind of hit me out of nowhere one day, as an analogy. Poor analogies often confuse things more than they help, but I felt this one really gets to the point of the absurd nature of the argument.

I agree. An analogy can either illuminate or muddy matters. Depending on if it is a good one. I think yours is brilliant.

Haha yes, that was a deliberate Easter egg, I knew you'd like it And I tried to make it entertaining as I know you would probably like my silly sense of humour!

Heheheh ahahha. It was hilarious I fucking love your sense of humor!

So did you have me in mind to be one of the people to find it? lol.

[Edwardo Piet]

Haha yes, that was a deliberate Easter egg, I knew you'd like it And I tried to make it entertaining as I know you would probably like my silly sense of humour!

P.S. I look forward to more hidden Easter eggs! Finding hidden ones as well adds to the humor even more! Love it!!

[LadyForCamus]

LOVED this as a visual, Rob! Thank you for sharing!

[CapnAwesome]

To be honest, the most common logical fallacy I've seen on these forums is misapplication of logical fallacies to where there are none (which is a form of a straw man) by giving the sense the person is saying this and this which is a form of a fallacy.

Actually it's called the fallacy fallacy and yeah, it's definitely the most commonly used logical fallacy on this forum and probably on the internet. Learning about logical fallacies is fine but often times people will point out them in this sort of scenario:

Person A: Well Glen Beck is in favor of the Iraq war, and he's an idiot so I think the war is bad.
Person B: That's a logical fallacy: ad hominem!

Ironically just calling someone out on a logical fallacy and not attempting to address their root idea (in the example you would still have to prove that the war is good) is the fallacy fallacy. It's frequently an attempt to kill the discussion and smugly feel intellectually superior to the other person without actually having to present any ideas. There have been some people on these forums who were terrible about this. Back when DeistPaladin posted he would scan every post that he disagreed with for anything that might be a logical fallacy and then point them out, but very rarely address the actual point. There are lots of other people who do it to a lesser degree too. Again the irony is that by lazily pointing out logical fallacies the person is committing one. That's why even when someone annoyingly strawman's me or something I don't say 'Strawman!!! Wah wah waaah" Instead I would say something like 'you are misrepresenting what was saying, here is what I actually meant' That pushes the discussion forward, most of the time crying logical fallacy is more of an end to a discussion that upsets the other person and degenerates to name calling.

It's also important to note that just because someone uses logical fallacies doesn't make them wrong nor does being careful about not using them make someone right.

[robvalue]

I read the implication because it was otherwise an entirely pointless thing to say.

It's not pointless. In a discussion seeking to mutually understand each other, we should come to agreement on what we both agree upon and what disagree upon. I haven't made any argument really for God or for religion yet in that thread. You've made anti-religion arguments, but I've shown, I don't take your assumptions you basing them on for granted. I come with a different view point but I don't have to yet show your view point is false, to refute it. I simply showing a perspective I have that disagrees with what you are stating. You haven't show your viewpoint correct and I never called you out on it. This while you keep calling me out while I haven't made an argument for God/Islam as of yet on the thread claiming it proves I am right.

OK fine. I retracted that bit as it was a bit harsh, apologies.

I've tried very hard, but I'm going to have to give up debating you MK. I can't understand what you're talking about and these misunderstanding are just going to keep happening.

@Evie: I did have you in mind, yeah I thought it would be just up your street. I'm really glad you like the vid! I'll see if I can think of more to do. You can bet there will be more stupid-ass Easter eggs

@camus: Thanks very much! I'm really happy you like it

If there is any particular logical fallacy people want me to tackle next, let me know!

[Edwardo Piet]

@Evie: I did have you in mind, yeah I thought it would be just up your street. I'm really glad you like the vid! I'll see if I can think of more to do. You can bet there will be more stupid-ass Easter eggs

YAY!!!!!!!!!!

[robvalue]

High five my cool virtual bro!

My wife would just... kick my ass if I showed her that video, haha.

[Edwardo Piet]

hahaha