AF Hall of Fallacies

[Rayaan]

I don't use reason as it applies only to logic... seems shortsighted, and horribly myopic of the process as it obsesses over the subject I'd first have to know why something being illogical means it's unreasonable to judge your argument on it's merits... and I'm willing to use your definition to do it (though expect it to be critiqued) if you should feel up to providing it

Yes, I also don't use reason as if it applies only to logic. Reason is a bigger concept and logic is a part of it. That's why I said that if something is not reasonable, that doesn't necessarily mean that it is illogical as well.

However, if something is reasonable, then it cannot be shown/proven to be illogical. And if something can be proven to be illogical, then it can't be reasonable.

I guess the proof and the method one goes about establishing it is the hardest part.

Because I'm being reasonable, and not logical. Logically, you're both equally capable of writing me an essay that I will consider 'good'... but I have cause to believe (faith, btw) that Tiberius would do a better job of it than you.

And the cause for your belief that Tiberius would do a better job at it is that he has more knowledge on the particular topic than I have - is that right or wrong? If that is right, then that means you agree that people who are more knowledgeable in a particular field (authorities) are more likely to be correct, though not necessarily.

Doctor, if I'm looking for information. Lawyer if I think getting information is secondary to telling people what to do with my shit

So ... you believe that a doctor is more likely to give you more helpful information about your health than a laywer would (which is not incorrect).

Then, would it be a true claim to say that you have a greater confidence in authorities (though not always) to a certain extent, at least?