3 ms·

My original and subsequent posts were that the nuke made the world safer. Post-1945 battle deaths dropped to near-zero by comparison to pre-1945. Even one batt

• pdonis 2y ago
  > My original and subsequent posts were that the nuke made the world safer. Post-1945 battle deaths dropped to near-zero by comparison to pre-1945. Post hoc ergo propter hoc is a well known logical fallacy. That is what you are doing here. Also, the relevant comparison, as I said before, is not post-1945 vs. pre-1945. It is something like post-1945 vs. pre-1914, so that the comparison involves peacetime conditions on both sides.
  • FredPret 2y ago
    I’m claiming a direct causality between how terrible the nukes were and how peaceful the subsequent decades have been. The cold war was cold because of M.A.D. And I will compare any periods I want. The nukes fell in 1945, so I compare all of human history before that and after that. There’s a clear and massive decline even if you only look at pre-1914 rates.
    • pdonis 2y ago
      > I’m claiming a direct causality You are inferring direct causality based on one event following another. That is the logical fallacy I referred to. > There’s a clear and massive decline even if you only look at pre-1914 rates. That's not what I see, so I guess we'll just have to disagree.