RE: Logical Fallacies
June 30, 2012 at 2:16 pm
(This post was last modified: June 30, 2012 at 2:20 pm by Chris.Roth.)
The discussion of fallacies in general is well appreciated on my part. As I said before, the accidental slip of a fallacy or necessity to use one in order to sustain an argument is understandable. However, using one every 10 seconds (furthermore, the SAME fallacy over and over again) should be recognized as quite pathetic. I have seen many times where Hitchens, Dawkins, hell any person I happen to agree with, has been put in an uncomfortable place by argument; has had the audience against them; have lost a debate. Both debators have used fallacies, perhaps. Maybe only has has, who cares? No one notices because it's not abjectly obvious. However, in the debate I referenced, perhaps I should rephrase my question: Was Galloway using fallacies to a point of non sequitur, or did his fallacies have any sort of genuine reason?
Well I can't quite be blinded to the truth of a situation as I see the situation at hand. I do, however, feel that disregarding the obvious ugly truth, or avoiding it, has the potential to hinder objectivity. Debate, in my opinion, is about more than winning. It's about presenting an argument for a very real situation. (My reference earlier to Starcraft can be used here as well--no person will be changed in their ideals, most likely, from watching a Starcraft game. However, a persons entire foundation can be uprooted by seeing the right argument at a debate.) Perhaps my primary argument is to those who choose to embark on debate, and the argument is simple--respect the format. Respect the fallacies you use. Respect your own fucking audience, for God's sake.
(June 28, 2012 at 6:39 am)NoMoreFaith Wrote:(June 28, 2012 at 5:32 am)Chris.Roth Wrote: You win the further retardation of humanity, congratulations.
You're being too idealistic. The fact remains that debates are very much a game. Save your anger for the methodology, not those that point out ugly truths.
Nothing wrong with ideals, as long as they don't blind you to the truth of a situation.
Well I can't quite be blinded to the truth of a situation as I see the situation at hand. I do, however, feel that disregarding the obvious ugly truth, or avoiding it, has the potential to hinder objectivity. Debate, in my opinion, is about more than winning. It's about presenting an argument for a very real situation. (My reference earlier to Starcraft can be used here as well--no person will be changed in their ideals, most likely, from watching a Starcraft game. However, a persons entire foundation can be uprooted by seeing the right argument at a debate.) Perhaps my primary argument is to those who choose to embark on debate, and the argument is simple--respect the format. Respect the fallacies you use. Respect your own fucking audience, for God's sake.
Chris Roth
http://thereligiousfallacy.wordpress.com/
http://thereligiousfallacy.wordpress.com/