4 ms·

The fact that some of us here mentioned "reasonable doubt" explains the shortcomings we currently have in depth of analysis beyond anything superficial. Our jus

The fact that some of us here mentioned "reasonable doubt" explains the shortcomings we currently have in depth of analysis beyond anything superficial. Our justifications sound like this - "while we murdered them in millions earlier, and now we murder them in thousands - we reserve the right to interrogate, disservice, and harass any of them on our soil should they speak the wrong way". If we are true Americans, we'd say this instead - "I believe in their right to liberty as much as ours. I will not be afraid because someone is speaking Arabic, or because someone's skin in brown, or because someone's face is bearded. I share the dangerous climate on our planet with my Muslim brothers, and I will take on the risks without stooping to bigotry. I will walk the straight path, and I will uphold the fundamentals of the very constitution our nation is built upon. We will fight terrorism together, for I understand it is a disease that has roots in no religion but in apathy." Edit: omit "sickening". changed "you" to "we". Changed "three people" to "some of us"

nothrabannosir 11y ago
> ...true Americans... Careful with that; it's the no true scotsman fallacy. The sad thing is that these people are, in fact, True Americans.
- dietrichepp 11y ago
  Here it's used as a rhetorical device, "true Americans" is an appeal to our sense of national identity. Be careful identifying fallacies by the superficial qualities they have, pay attention to the context where phrases are used.
  - gtremper 11y ago
    Isn't "no true Scotsman" an appeal to national identity?
    - deleted 11y ago
      [deleted]
    - dietrichepp 11y ago
      No it's not. It's a redefinition of terms to exclude counterexamples. I could say "no sandwich is vegetarian" and you show me a grilled cheese sandwich and I say "no true sandwich is vegetarian." The problem is that people have been passing around a cheat sheet of logical fallacies, but using the mental version of a regex to try and match them. This is not a reliable technique for identifying fallacies. Usually, you would want to recognize them by their content, not their form, and it's essential to know the difference between formal and informal fallacies.
      - deleted 11y ago
        [deleted]
      - SherlockeHolmes 10y ago
        Thank you for the great post! I especially agree with your second paragraph. I admit that my post constitutes a mixture of ethos, pathos, and logos - as opposed to being perfectly aligned with logical stipulations.
  - deleted 11y ago
    [deleted]
nxzero 11y ago
Chart Shows How Irrational Fear of Terrorism Is: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11516085 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11516085
- cb18 11y ago
  It's not good to be disablingly fearful of Islamic terrorism, but we do need to be prudent, and proactive in preventing it. What those silly charts get wrong, is that the other 'fearful' things they compare terrorism to are well understood phenomena with linear input, outputs. More vehicles on the road, more traffic casualties, more smoking, more lung cancer, more overeating, more diseases of obesity, etc. etc. In taking precaution against terrorism we must be aware that there is potential for nonlinear type events. A single event can drastically alter any metrics of average terrorism damage over a given time frame. A little inconvenience for somebody now or then if it means heading off a potential explosive black swan type event, is just a fact of the modern world as long as there is Islam in the west.
  - DanBC 11y ago
    >A little inconvenience for somebody now or then if it means heading of a potential explosive black swan type event, is just a fact of the modern world as long as there is Islam in the west. But the salami slicing of convenience means hundreds of millions of people have been inconvenienced (by having to remove their shoes) because one guy one time tried to set fire to his plastique explosive footwear. How many human hours have been spent in queues at airports for this?
    - cb18 11y ago
      That's a good point, the way that the collateral inconvenience is dispensed is obviously far from perfect and definitely needs calibration. What's ironic about the point you raise, is that it stems from one of the main topics of this thread. Our collective refusal to admit that perpetrators of Islamic terrorism are heavily concentrated under a narrow band of characteristics means we all have to endure abject silliness like grannies and children being groped, and having to take off our shoes.
cb18 11y ago
We will fight terrorism together, for I understand it is a disease that has roots in no religion but in apathy. What are you basing such a claim on? If you ask the Islamists committing attacks, they will tell you just the opposite. If you read their literature, it will tell you just the opposite. I'm guessing you've done neither of those. How one can conflate apathy, and the numerous proactive measures and actions necessary to carry out one of these attacks is beyond me... If more people aren't disabused of these silly, naive, indoctrinated notions, we aren't going to make any progress in solving this problem. The fact that I'm just stating facts, but many will no doubt read it as 'radical' or 'racist,' should give everyone pause.

nothrabannosir 11y ago

> ...true Americans... Careful with that; it's the no true scotsman fallacy. The sad thing is that these people are, in fact, True Americans.

dietrichepp 11y ago
Here it's used as a rhetorical device, "true Americans" is an appeal to our sense of national identity. Be careful identifying fallacies by the superficial qualities they have, pay attention to the context where phrases are used.
- gtremper 11y ago
  Isn't "no true Scotsman" an appeal to national identity?
  - deleted 11y ago
    [deleted]
  - dietrichepp 11y ago
    No it's not. It's a redefinition of terms to exclude counterexamples. I could say "no sandwich is vegetarian" and you show me a grilled cheese sandwich and I say "no true sandwich is vegetarian." The problem is that people have been passing around a cheat sheet of logical fallacies, but using the mental version of a regex to try and match them. This is not a reliable technique for identifying fallacies. Usually, you would want to recognize them by their content, not their form, and it's essential to know the difference between formal and informal fallacies.
    - deleted 11y ago
      [deleted]
    - SherlockeHolmes 10y ago
      Thank you for the great post! I especially agree with your second paragraph. I admit that my post constitutes a mixture of ethos, pathos, and logos - as opposed to being perfectly aligned with logical stipulations.
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]

nxzero 11y ago

Chart Shows How Irrational Fear of Terrorism Is: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11516085 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11516085

cb18 11y ago
It's not good to be disablingly fearful of Islamic terrorism, but we do need to be prudent, and proactive in preventing it. What those silly charts get wrong, is that the other 'fearful' things they compare terrorism to are well understood phenomena with linear input, outputs. More vehicles on the road, more traffic casualties, more smoking, more lung cancer, more overeating, more diseases of obesity, etc. etc. In taking precaution against terrorism we must be aware that there is potential for nonlinear type events. A single event can drastically alter any metrics of average terrorism damage over a given time frame. A little inconvenience for somebody now or then if it means heading off a potential explosive black swan type event, is just a fact of the modern world as long as there is Islam in the west.
- DanBC 11y ago
  >A little inconvenience for somebody now or then if it means heading of a potential explosive black swan type event, is just a fact of the modern world as long as there is Islam in the west. But the salami slicing of convenience means hundreds of millions of people have been inconvenienced (by having to remove their shoes) because one guy one time tried to set fire to his plastique explosive footwear. How many human hours have been spent in queues at airports for this?
  - cb18 11y ago
    That's a good point, the way that the collateral inconvenience is dispensed is obviously far from perfect and definitely needs calibration. What's ironic about the point you raise, is that it stems from one of the main topics of this thread. Our collective refusal to admit that perpetrators of Islamic terrorism are heavily concentrated under a narrow band of characteristics means we all have to endure abject silliness like grannies and children being groped, and having to take off our shoes.

cb18 11y ago

We will fight terrorism together, for I understand it is a disease that has roots in no religion but in apathy. What are you basing such a claim on? If you ask the Islamists committing attacks, they will tell you just the opposite. If you read their literature, it will tell you just the opposite. I'm guessing you've done neither of those. How one can conflate apathy, and the numerous proactive measures and actions necessary to carry out one of these attacks is beyond me... If more people aren't disabused of these silly, naive, indoctrinated notions, we aren't going to make any progress in solving this problem. The fact that I'm just stating facts, but many will no doubt read it as 'radical' or 'racist,' should give everyone pause.