Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
Current time: March 30, 2020, 2:31 pm

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Logical Fallacies
#31
RE: Logical Fallacies
(June 27, 2012 at 11:00 pm)apophenia Wrote: What do I win?

The prize prepared for such an occasion was a stick, funnily enough.
Reply
#32
RE: Logical Fallacies
(June 27, 2012 at 11:00 pm)apophenia Wrote:


I'd say the reason you're pushing the point so hard is because you've got a stick up your ass. How's that for appealing to emotion?



What do I win?



You win the further retardation of humanity, congratulations.
Reply
#33
RE: Logical Fallacies
(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.
Self-authenticating private evidence is useless, because it is indistinguishable from the illusion of it. ― Kel, Kelosophy Blog

If you’re going to watch tele, you should watch Scooby Doo. That show was so cool because every time there’s a church with a ghoul, or a ghost in a school. They looked beneath the mask and what was inside?
The f**king janitor or the dude who runs the waterslide. Throughout history every mystery. Ever solved has turned out to be. Not Magic.
― Tim Minchin, Storm
Reply
#34
RE: Logical Fallacies
Fallacies are a legitimate part of debate; both in their use and the accusation of their use. The whole point is to make your argument appealing to the audience. Sometimes you may not have a very appealing argument, so clever maneuvering is required. As someone already pointed out; the use of logical fallacies alone does not mean an argument is wrong, it can be the case that the argument is not being represented correctly. People often call out fallacies, knowing full well that the argument itself is sound, in order to discredit their opponent - argument from fallacy, is one such example of this tactic.
Reply
#35
RE: Logical Fallacies
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?

(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.
Reply
#36
RE: Logical Fallacies
I agree with Chris completely. Intentionally using logical fallacies as tools to win a debate is intellectually dishonest. It's cheating, and there is no point in debating anyone who cheats.

See pz myers, "Why I don't debate christians anymore, part whatever...":

[Image: Debate-Flow-Chart.jpg]
Reply
#37
RE: Logical Fallacies
In high school,from age 16,I often took part in debates. I always took the position contra to my real opinion,and often won. My idea was to improve my thinking skills. Didn't work. I just learned to be more devious than I was already.

What I learned was not to conflate winning an argument/debate with being right [as a principle]. I also learned how hard it is to change most people's strongly held opinions about anything,assuming one is interested enough to try,which I rarely am. I also learned that consistently open minded people ,as with consistently rational people are as common as unicorn shit.
Man is not so much a rational animal as a rationalising one.
Reply
#38
RE: Logical Fallacies
(July 2, 2012 at 9:56 pm)padraic Wrote: I also learned that consistently open minded people ,as with consistently rational people are as common as unicorn shit.

I actually stepped in a pile of that this morning. Thankfully, it was made of sugary gummy worms so I picked up a handful and ate it.
Reply
#39
RE: Logical Fallacies
(July 2, 2012 at 9:56 pm)padraic Wrote: In high school,from age 16,I often took part in debates. I always took the position contra to my real opinion,and often won. My idea was to improve my thinking skills. Didn't work. I just learned to be more devious than I was already.

What I learned was not to conflate winning an argument/debate with being right [as a principle]. I also learned how hard it is to change most people's strongly held opinions about anything,assuming one is interested enough to try,which I rarely am. I also learned that consistently open minded people ,as with consistently rational people are as common as unicorn shit.

Such debates are skewed toward those who cheat. Personal honesty is irrelevant. I find them to be irrelevant to the real world.

One problem I see, though, is that most judicial systems are set up in the same sort of format...
Reply
#40
RE: Logical Fallacies
Can someone explain fallacies to me. And how galloway used them? (sorry. New here)
Reply



Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Logic Fallacies: A Quiz to Test Your Knowledge, A Cheat Sheet to Refresh It Rhondazvous 0 595 March 6, 2017 at 6:48 pm
Last Post: Rhondazvous
  Is there a logical, rational reason why hate is bad? WisdomOfTheTrees 27 2158 February 4, 2017 at 10:43 pm
Last Post: BrianSoddingBoru4
  AF Hall of Fallacies Ray101aan 107 54042 January 12, 2017 at 5:44 pm
Last Post: The Grand Nudger
  Logical Absolutes Tiberius 14 11984 November 20, 2016 at 3:23 pm
Last Post: Edwardo Piet
  Matt Dilahunty On The Logical Absolutes Edwardo Piet 30 3853 November 20, 2016 at 8:05 am
Last Post: Edwardo Piet
  Logical contradictions in certain notions of monotheistic deities Mudhammam 5 938 May 7, 2016 at 12:08 pm
Last Post: LadyForCamus
  All Logical Fallacies Heat 20 1743 April 3, 2016 at 10:45 am
Last Post: robvalue
  Is nihilism the logical extreme of atheism? Whateverist 301 27858 October 23, 2014 at 2:26 pm
Last Post: TreeSapNest
  Why all "Logical Proofs Of God" fail ... MitchBenn 90 11105 March 19, 2014 at 7:56 am
Last Post: tor
  Flashy site for logical fallacies. Tiberius 12 4290 August 27, 2012 at 5:07 am
Last Post: Tempus



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)