4 ms·
> This comment falls directly into the "things never change" fallacy. That sounds interesting. I looked for it, and I just found references to the "tradition f
by kartan 8y ago
> This comment falls directly into the "things never change" fallacy.
That sounds interesting. I looked for it, and I just found references to the "tradition fallacy" that only deals with resistance to change.
Can you provide a link?
> Picking one sample piece of anecdotal data from another period that can roughly be lined up with some other vague impressions of today does not refute the claim.
I provided an anecdote example as a means to be more pedagogic. It is easier to understand concepts from the concrete to the abstract. So you are completely right, my anecdote does not refute the claim.
- pasabagi 8y agoI guess the oldest quote would be in the bible, as "there's no new thing under the sun". In any case though, I don't really understand the point of using 'fallacy' aside from cases where it's an actual logical fallacy. You can probably cover every habit of thought and discourse under a banner of fallacy, if you pick out the ways in which they are used badly - since people tend to think badly due to misapplied habits.