5 ms·

I have a friend who is a lawyer. He seems to believe that rhetoric and logic are the same thing. Links like this bring me bad memories.

haecceity 7y ago
Should've thrown a dictionary at him.
- bananamerica 7y ago
  I gave up arguing with him. He’s my friend and I love him. We play video games instead. No problem.
teddyh 7y ago
A lawyer’s job is not to actually find out the truth, like a scientist. A lawyer’s conclusion will not be tested by a harsh reality with which you can experiment. A lawyer’s job is entirely to convince other people of things. If people are convinced, the job is done; there are no further repercussions if the truth turns out to differ. Therefore, your lawyer friend likely has never thought about what logic is, or what a scientist does, and how physical reality with experiments is a harsh and unforgiving master, and therefore believes that everything is what he does – i.e. rhetoric.
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
- bananamerica 7y ago
  I believe you’re right. I gave him a book on informal logic. He never even opened it.
- Merrill 7y ago
  There is also a distinction between logical and quantitative thinking. Some people operate mainly out of a "whether or not" mindset, and they are not inclined to think in terms of "how much", "to what degree", or "how likely". Scientists tend to be quantitative thinkers, although computer scientists are quite often logical thinkers.
  - stareatgoats 7y ago
    Agree in principle, but I have an issue with your use of the terms "logical/quantitative". A pedantic nitpick to be sure, but the "logical" mindset you describe is one of the most prevalent logical fallacies, that of the "false dilemma" [0]. Maybe there are even better ways to describe it than as a logical fallacy, but calling it "logical thinking" leads down the wrong track IMO. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_dilemma https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_dilemma
    - mjburgess 7y ago
      He did not claim they were exclusive. Your comment is an example of the fallacy fallacy.
      - stareatgoats 7y ago
        Maybe so but I struggle to understand how, I must admit. In case you would care to elaborate I would be interested. But unless you will argue that "logical thinking" is the correct term in this case I will submit that you have delivered a faulty argument yourself (since you invalidate my whole comment and not just the relevant part). Not sure which logical fallacy that represents though ...
      - deleted 7y ago
        [deleted]
      - bananamerica 7y ago
        The "fallacy fallacy" is valid for itself, though: > since the fallacy fallacy is itself a fallacy, it cannot be used to label an argument's conclusion as false without committing it in the process. "You have used the fallacy fallacy, therefore you are wrong" https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Fallacy_fallacy https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Fallacy_fallacy
    - kdmccormick 7y ago
      Maybe "black and white thinking" is what's being described.
lolc 7y ago
There is just the book for him: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Art_of_Being_Right https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Art_of_Being_Right
- bananamerica 7y ago
  Thanks. But I don’t that’s fixable in my friends case. It’s a long story :P
  - lolc 7y ago
    While I find the book to be written in a sarcastic tone, some people take it at face value. Your friend might be among them and enjoy the read in a very different way. Choice quote: "and if he emerges victorious from a contest, he owes it very often not so much to the correctness of his judgment in stating his proposition, as to the cunning and address with which he defended it. "
    - bananamerica 7y ago
      Thanks... even though you suggested it for my friend, I think I'll just read it myself. He's extremely intelligent (which makes his irrational tendencies more annoying hahaha), but he simply doesn't read anything I give him. Oh, well :P

haecceity 7y ago

Should've thrown a dictionary at him.

bananamerica 7y ago
I gave up arguing with him. He’s my friend and I love him. We play video games instead. No problem.

teddyh 7y ago

A lawyer’s job is not to actually find out the truth, like a scientist. A lawyer’s conclusion will not be tested by a harsh reality with which you can experiment. A lawyer’s job is entirely to convince other people of things. If people are convinced, the job is done; there are no further repercussions if the truth turns out to differ. Therefore, your lawyer friend likely has never thought about what logic is, or what a scientist does, and how physical reality with experiments is a harsh and unforgiving master, and therefore believes that everything is what he does – i.e. rhetoric.

deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
bananamerica 7y ago
I believe you’re right. I gave him a book on informal logic. He never even opened it.
Merrill 7y ago
There is also a distinction between logical and quantitative thinking. Some people operate mainly out of a "whether or not" mindset, and they are not inclined to think in terms of "how much", "to what degree", or "how likely". Scientists tend to be quantitative thinkers, although computer scientists are quite often logical thinkers.
- stareatgoats 7y ago
  Agree in principle, but I have an issue with your use of the terms "logical/quantitative". A pedantic nitpick to be sure, but the "logical" mindset you describe is one of the most prevalent logical fallacies, that of the "false dilemma" [0]. Maybe there are even better ways to describe it than as a logical fallacy, but calling it "logical thinking" leads down the wrong track IMO. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_dilemma https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_dilemma
  - mjburgess 7y ago
    He did not claim they were exclusive. Your comment is an example of the fallacy fallacy.
    - stareatgoats 7y ago
      Maybe so but I struggle to understand how, I must admit. In case you would care to elaborate I would be interested. But unless you will argue that "logical thinking" is the correct term in this case I will submit that you have delivered a faulty argument yourself (since you invalidate my whole comment and not just the relevant part). Not sure which logical fallacy that represents though ...
    - deleted 7y ago
      [deleted]
    - bananamerica 7y ago
      The "fallacy fallacy" is valid for itself, though: > since the fallacy fallacy is itself a fallacy, it cannot be used to label an argument's conclusion as false without committing it in the process. "You have used the fallacy fallacy, therefore you are wrong" https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Fallacy_fallacy https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Fallacy_fallacy
  - kdmccormick 7y ago
    Maybe "black and white thinking" is what's being described.

lolc 7y ago

There is just the book for him: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Art_of_Being_Right https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Art_of_Being_Right

bananamerica 7y ago
Thanks. But I don’t that’s fixable in my friends case. It’s a long story :P
- lolc 7y ago
  While I find the book to be written in a sarcastic tone, some people take it at face value. Your friend might be among them and enjoy the read in a very different way. Choice quote: "and if he emerges victorious from a contest, he owes it very often not so much to the correctness of his judgment in stating his proposition, as to the cunning and address with which he defended it. "
  - bananamerica 7y ago
    Thanks... even though you suggested it for my friend, I think I'll just read it myself. He's extremely intelligent (which makes his irrational tendencies more annoying hahaha), but he simply doesn't read anything I give him. Oh, well :P