3 ms·
The whole point of the fallacy is that this other stuff isn't relevant to the truth of the argument, and it does nothing to inform us about the argument. You c
by Natsu 4y ago
The whole point of the fallacy is that this other stuff isn't relevant to the truth of the argument, and it does nothing to inform us about the argument.
You can't figure out the time by arguing over broken clocks. And you're only interested in staying on message here, not about whether these things are even true or not.
- Dylan16807 4y agoIf someone is trying to use a broken clock as a source, it's valuable to tell them it's broken. The clock doesn't tell you if they're right or not. I agree here, see me agreeing! That's the part that would be a fallacy! But knowing that the clock is broken means you know that any conclusions based on the clock contain zero information. They might be right, but only by accident. So you should completely reject the argument, without completely rejecting the result. To make that even more explicit: An argument and the conclusion of that argument are different things. The bar for rejecting an argument is lower than the bar for rejecting its conclusion. And the bar for being extra skeptical is even lower. The fallacy you're describing happens when you reject the conclusion. It does not happen when you reject the argument.
- Natsu 4y agoIf someone tells you that someone is wrong and yet they can't explain how, they're a broken clock.