3 ms·

Logical fallacy of composition/division. My comment isn't being applied to all these other scenarios, it is being applied to the topic at hand—psychedelics.

WastingMyTime89 4y ago
There is no logical fallacy. Your original comment is just wrong. If psychedelics improve the outcome, they are still worthwhile even if the therapy is still needed and not a placebo. You are just misplacing the bar. The analogy to performance enhancing drugs is actually quite good.
- hammyhavoc 4y ago
  There absolutely is. They held up countless irrelevant examples that have nothing to do with psychedelics, thus casting a wide net. My original comment is my opinion. When there's further studies done rather than anecdotal rubbish pertaining to woowoo in the comments, then I'll reconsider my stance. Analogies are unnecessary and distracting.
  - bmacho 4y ago
    > My original comment is my opinion. Not at all. "The sky is blue, therefore dogs are green" is not an opinion but a statement, factually incorrect, and annoyingly incomprehensible. The idea that you presented, that if something doesn't solve everything then it is useless is just not true. Maybe you should keep this in mind.
    - hammyhavoc 4y ago
      I never said it was useless.
coldtea 4y ago
Logical fallacy of non seguitur. The logic of the comment should hold for any analogous scenario. You either have to argue why one or all of the above analogies doesn't hold (what element is crucially different, so that the same counter-argument can't apply to your psychedelics argument), or to argue that the points made for those other things are wrong. Except if you believe that you've discovered some unique logic that only applies to a single specific case.
- hammyhavoc 4y ago
  I don't have to argue, period. An analogy is unnecessary. We are talking about psychedelics, not doping in sports. My opinion: people are likely commonly capable of working through things without the use of psychedelics, and we are crediting the substance and not the human being. I'm not anti-drugs by any stretch, just feel like a lot more research needs to be done before we can start stating things like they're facts. Can you otherwise disprove that it wasn't placebo effect and the individual wouldn't have otherwise figured it out without a placebo or with a sugar pill he was told was a microdose of psychedelics that would unlock the secrets of the universe?
  - kaoD 4y ago
    Well, during victorian times people got through surgery without anesthetics. What's your point? Not sure why you think studies aren't controlling for placebo? Although it's obviously notoriously hard with psychedelics. Just to be clear: I agree that more studies are needed, just disagree with the rest of your statements.
    - hammyhavoc 4y ago
      That over time, through time-proven hypothesis, we arrive at a modern understanding of our biology and psychology. So you openly admit that this is difficult to assess? That much we can agree on at least.
      - kaoD 4y ago
        In fact I'd go a step further and say that it's not only difficult but impossible to assess since it's pretty easy for the test subject to discern whether he was given a placebo or not, especially considering that the benefits are suspected to come from the induced experience itself and not the drug as a substance in isolation. You can't control if exercising is placebo either, can you? But the consensus is that it's physically and mentally beneficial. I don't think controlling for placebo is of great use here although it obviously has to be taken into account.

WastingMyTime89 4y ago

There is no logical fallacy. Your original comment is just wrong. If psychedelics improve the outcome, they are still worthwhile even if the therapy is still needed and not a placebo. You are just misplacing the bar. The analogy to performance enhancing drugs is actually quite good.

hammyhavoc 4y ago
There absolutely is. They held up countless irrelevant examples that have nothing to do with psychedelics, thus casting a wide net. My original comment is my opinion. When there's further studies done rather than anecdotal rubbish pertaining to woowoo in the comments, then I'll reconsider my stance. Analogies are unnecessary and distracting.
- bmacho 4y ago
  > My original comment is my opinion. Not at all. "The sky is blue, therefore dogs are green" is not an opinion but a statement, factually incorrect, and annoyingly incomprehensible. The idea that you presented, that if something doesn't solve everything then it is useless is just not true. Maybe you should keep this in mind.
  - hammyhavoc 4y ago
    I never said it was useless.

coldtea 4y ago

Logical fallacy of non seguitur. The logic of the comment should hold for any analogous scenario. You either have to argue why one or all of the above analogies doesn't hold (what element is crucially different, so that the same counter-argument can't apply to your psychedelics argument), or to argue that the points made for those other things are wrong. Except if you believe that you've discovered some unique logic that only applies to a single specific case.

hammyhavoc 4y ago
I don't have to argue, period. An analogy is unnecessary. We are talking about psychedelics, not doping in sports. My opinion: people are likely commonly capable of working through things without the use of psychedelics, and we are crediting the substance and not the human being. I'm not anti-drugs by any stretch, just feel like a lot more research needs to be done before we can start stating things like they're facts. Can you otherwise disprove that it wasn't placebo effect and the individual wouldn't have otherwise figured it out without a placebo or with a sugar pill he was told was a microdose of psychedelics that would unlock the secrets of the universe?
- kaoD 4y ago
  Well, during victorian times people got through surgery without anesthetics. What's your point? Not sure why you think studies aren't controlling for placebo? Although it's obviously notoriously hard with psychedelics. Just to be clear: I agree that more studies are needed, just disagree with the rest of your statements.
  - hammyhavoc 4y ago
    That over time, through time-proven hypothesis, we arrive at a modern understanding of our biology and psychology. So you openly admit that this is difficult to assess? That much we can agree on at least.
    - kaoD 4y ago
      In fact I'd go a step further and say that it's not only difficult but impossible to assess since it's pretty easy for the test subject to discern whether he was given a placebo or not, especially considering that the benefits are suspected to come from the induced experience itself and not the drug as a substance in isolation. You can't control if exercising is placebo either, can you? But the consensus is that it's physically and mentally beneficial. I don't think controlling for placebo is of great use here although it obviously has to be taken into account.