4 ms·

Your Logical Fallacy Is:

15 points by kposehn 14y ago

rtpg 14y ago
I think this has been discussed before here. Some guy made a comment along the lines that, on some sort of meta level, these arguments have some validity because ultimately we are talking about humans. Someone might remember the point better than me, it was convincing when I read it
markdown 14y ago
Interesting choice to use https when it clearly isn't necessary.
- iceron 14y ago
  Probably to unmask 'not provided' search referrals.
El_Mariachi 14y ago
Remember, not all arguments/debates are exercises in formal logic. A Slippery Slope argument, for instance, might be perfectly valid in a legal context where precedent carries weight. Also, Ad Hominem is not a synonym for “insult.”
Samuel_Michon 14y ago
Be aware that while the site lists 24 common fallacies, many more exist: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fallacies http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fallacies
- nazgulnarsil 14y ago
  The poster encourages availability bias!
- itafroma 14y ago
  For a comprehensive list complete with formal definitions, explanations, and examples, I prefer the Fallacy Files: http://www.fallacyfiles.org/index.html http://www.fallacyfiles.org/index.html
coldtea 14y ago
"Your Logical Fallacy Is" giving too much credit to "logical fallacies". Conversations are not formal proof, in pure logic. And logical fallacies are not pure logic either. More like guidelines. In the real world, where you don't have all the information at hand, and you have trust levels and possibilities and resource limits, a "logical fallacy" can be more beneficial (statistically) than not. Case in point: "appeal to authority". If I'm sick, I'd rather trust my doctor, than a non-doctor guy, just for the fact that the doctor has a MD and he does not. I don't have time to study medicine and examine both approaches (e.g I could be bleeding to death). So the more rational thing to do here is listen to the authority, not the random guy. Similar issues can be found for most of the other fallacies, from ad hominem to no-true-scotchman and beyond. Nice guidelines, but by no means complete and by no means appropriate for all real life situations. Like Occam's Razor. It's just a guideline too. Sometimes the MORE complex story, with the more entities involved in it, is the one that actually happened. E.g in police cases. There is often a clean-cut explanation that might seem obvious but is wrong, and a more involved story that is what actually happened. Lots of innocent have fell prey to the "obvious" and "simple" explanation, only to be proven innocent many years later. Think of the movie "Arlington Road". What would most people think of the events, not knowing the whole story? "But most real cases are not like Arlington Road!" My point exactly. Most, not all. Occam's razor is a guideline, not a logical necessity.
- itafroma 14y ago
  A large problem with using "cheat sheet" lists of fallacies is that they lack the nuance of the actual fallacies they cite. An argument from authority is fallacious if, and only if, the authority cited is not an unbiased expert in the matter or there is no expert consensus on the matter. Trusting your doctor when you are sick is not an instance of fallacious reasoning. While I'm here, another problem with things like this is the tendency for people to use them as an argument-refuter-o-matic. Indicating an argument is fallacious is not a rebuttal of the argument: it's merely an indicator that the argument is incomplete. Using fallacies to rebut an argument is, somewhat ironically, itself a fallacy.
  - Clotho 14y ago

15 points by kposehn 14y ago

rtpg 14y ago

I think this has been discussed before here. Some guy made a comment along the lines that, on some sort of meta level, these arguments have some validity because ultimately we are talking about humans. Someone might remember the point better than me, it was convincing when I read it

markdown 14y ago

Interesting choice to use https when it clearly isn't necessary.

iceron 14y ago
Probably to unmask 'not provided' search referrals.

El_Mariachi 14y ago

Remember, not all arguments/debates are exercises in formal logic. A Slippery Slope argument, for instance, might be perfectly valid in a legal context where precedent carries weight. Also, Ad Hominem is not a synonym for “insult.”

Samuel_Michon 14y ago

Be aware that while the site lists 24 common fallacies, many more exist: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fallacies http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fallacies

nazgulnarsil 14y ago
The poster encourages availability bias!
itafroma 14y ago
For a comprehensive list complete with formal definitions, explanations, and examples, I prefer the Fallacy Files: http://www.fallacyfiles.org/index.html http://www.fallacyfiles.org/index.html

coldtea 14y ago

"Your Logical Fallacy Is" giving too much credit to "logical fallacies". Conversations are not formal proof, in pure logic. And logical fallacies are not pure logic either. More like guidelines. In the real world, where you don't have all the information at hand, and you have trust levels and possibilities and resource limits, a "logical fallacy" can be more beneficial (statistically) than not. Case in point: "appeal to authority". If I'm sick, I'd rather trust my doctor, than a non-doctor guy, just for the fact that the doctor has a MD and he does not. I don't have time to study medicine and examine both approaches (e.g I could be bleeding to death). So the more rational thing to do here is listen to the authority, not the random guy. Similar issues can be found for most of the other fallacies, from ad hominem to no-true-scotchman and beyond. Nice guidelines, but by no means complete and by no means appropriate for all real life situations. Like Occam's Razor. It's just a guideline too. Sometimes the MORE complex story, with the more entities involved in it, is the one that actually happened. E.g in police cases. There is often a clean-cut explanation that might seem obvious but is wrong, and a more involved story that is what actually happened. Lots of innocent have fell prey to the "obvious" and "simple" explanation, only to be proven innocent many years later. Think of the movie "Arlington Road". What would most people think of the events, not knowing the whole story? "But most real cases are not like Arlington Road!" My point exactly. Most, not all. Occam's razor is a guideline, not a logical necessity.

itafroma 14y ago
A large problem with using "cheat sheet" lists of fallacies is that they lack the nuance of the actual fallacies they cite. An argument from authority is fallacious if, and only if, the authority cited is not an unbiased expert in the matter or there is no expert consensus on the matter. Trusting your doctor when you are sick is not an instance of fallacious reasoning. While I'm here, another problem with things like this is the tendency for people to use them as an argument-refuter-o-matic. Indicating an argument is fallacious is not a rebuttal of the argument: it's merely an indicator that the argument is incomplete. Using fallacies to rebut an argument is, somewhat ironically, itself a fallacy.
- Clotho 14y ago