Our New Bible

Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Ask Zyra

Senior Member

12-08-2013

This is your Bible, learn it, Live it, Love it. Or face the Hammer. The hammer of ANNOYANCE!!!!

In all honesty I give negative f*cks, but this might help, maybe.

These are not rules, they are guidelines, manners if you will. If you must argue, don't be an a*s about it.
_____________________________________________

I have been informed that the ten fallacies that I posted are not in fact all of them. There are in fact 24. I will post a copy of everything that it says because the poster is to small.
_____________________________________________

Strawman- Misrepresenting someone's argument to make it easier to attack
By exaggerating, misrepresenting, or just completely fabricating someone's argument, it's much easier to present your own position as being reasonable, but this kind of dishonesty serves to undermine rational debate.

Slippery Slope- Asserting that if we allow A to happen, then Z will consequently happen to, therefore A should not happen
The problem with this reasoning is that it avoids engaging with the issue, and instead shifts attention to baseless extreme hypotheticals. The merits of the original argument are then tainted by unsubstantiated conjecture.

Special Pleading- Moving the goalposts or making up exceptions when a claim is shown to be false
Humans are funny creatures and have a foolish aversion to being wrong. Rather then appreciate the benefits of being able to change one's mind through better understanding, many will invent ways to cling to old beliefs.

The gambler's fallacy- Believing that "runs" occur to statistically independent phenomena such as roulette wheel spins
The commonly believed fallacy can be said to have helped create a city in the dessert of Nevada USA. Though the overall odds of a 'big run' happening may be low, each spin of the wheel is itself entirely independent from the last.

Black-or-White- Where Two alternative states are presented as the only possibilities, when in fact more possibilities exist
Also known as the false dilemma, this insidious tactic had the appearance of forming a logical argument, but under closer scrutiny it becomes evident that there are more possibilities the the either/or choice that is presented.

False Cause- Presuming that a real or perceived relationship between things means that one is the cause of the other.
Many people confuse correlation (things happening together in sequence) for causation (that one thing actually causes the other to happen). Sometimes correlation is coincidental, or it may be attributable to a common cause.

Ad Hominem- Attacking your opponent's character or personal traits in an attempt to undermine their argument
Ad hominem attacks can take the form of overtly attacking somebody, or casting doubt on their character. The result of an ad hom attack can be to undermine someone without actually engaging with the substance of their argument.

Loaded question- Asking a question that has an assumption built into it so that it can't be answered without appearing guilty
Loaded question fallacies are particularly effective at derailing rational debates because of their inflammatory nature - the recipient of the loaded question is compelled to defend themselves and may appear flustered or on the back foot.

Bandwagon- Appealing to popularity or the fact that may people do something as an attempted form of validation
The flaw in this argument is that the popularity of an idea has absolutely no bearing on its validity. If it did, then the earth would have made itself flat for most of history to accommodate popular belief.

Begging the question- A circular argument in which the conclusion is included in the premise.
This logically incoherent argument often arises in situations where people have am assumption that is very ingrained, and therefore taken in their minds as a given. Circular reasoning is bad mostly because it's not very good.

Appeal to authority- Saying that because an authority thinks something, it must therefore be true.
It's important to note that this fallacy should not be used to dismiss the claims of experts, or scientific consensus. Appeals to authority are not valid arguments, but nor is it reasonable to disregard the claims of experts who have demonstrated depth of knowledge unless one has a simlar level of understanding.

Appeal to nature- Making the argument that because something is 'natural' it is therefore justified, good, or ideal
Many 'natural' things are also considered 'good', and this can bias our thinking, but naturalness itself doesn't make something good or bad. For instance murder could be seen as very natural, but that doesn't mean it's justifiable.

Composition/division- Assuming that what's true about one part of something has to be applied to all, or other, parts of it.
Often when something is true for the part it does also apply to the whole, but because this isn't always the case it can't be presumed to be true. We must show evidence for why a consistency will exist.

Anecdotal- Using personal experience or an isolated example instead of a
valid argument, especially to dismiss statistics

It's often much easier for people to believe someone's testimony as opposed to understanding variation across a continuum. Scientific and statistical measures are almost always more accurate then individual perceptions and experiences.

Appeal to emotion- Manipulating an emotional response in place of a valid or compelling argument
Appeals to emotion include appeals to fear, envy, hatred, pity, guilt, and more. Though a valid, and reasoned, argument mat sometimes have an emotional aspect, one must be careful that emotion doesn't obscure or replace reason.

Tu quoque- Avoiding having to engage with criticism by turning it back on the accuser - answering criticism with criticism
Literally translating as 'you too' this fallacy is commonly employed as an effective red herring because it takes the heat off the accused having to defend themselves and it shifts the focus back onto the accuser themselves.

Burden of proof- Saying that the burden of proof lies not with the person making the claim, but with someone else to disprove.
The burden of proof lies with someone who is making the claim, and is not upon anyone else to disprove. The inability, or disinclination, to disprove a claim does not make it valid (however we must always go by the best available evidence.)

No true scotsmen- Making what could be called an appeal to purity as a way to dismiss relevant criticisms or flaws of an argument.
This fallacy is often employed as a measure of last resort when a point has been lost. Seeing that a criticism is valid, yet not wanting to admit it, new criteria are involved to dissociate oneself or one's argument.

The texas sharpshooter- Cherry-picking data clusters to suit an argument, or finding a pattern to fit a presumption.
this false cause fallacy is coined after a marksman shooting at barns and then painting a bullseye target around the spot where the most bullet holes appear. Clusters naturally appear by chance, and don't necessarily indicate causation.

The fallacy fallacy- Presuming a claim to be necessarily wrong because a fallacy has been committed
It is entirely possible to make a claim that is false yet argue with logical coherency for the claim, just as it is possible to make a claim that is true and justify it with various fallacies and poor arguments.

Personal incredulity- Saying that because one finds something difficult to understand, it's therefore not true.
Subjects such as biological evolution via the process of natural selection require a good amount of understanding before one is able to properly grasp them, this fallacy is usually used in place of that understanding.

Ambiguity- Using double meanings or ambiguities of language to mislead or misrepresent the truth
Politicians are often guiltily of using ambiguity to mislead and will later point to how they were technically not outright lying if they come under scrutiny. It's a particularly tricky and premeditated fallacy to commit.

Genetic- Judging something good or bad on the basis of where it comes from, or who it comes from
To appeal to prejudices surrounding something's origin is another red herring fallacy. This fallacy has the same function as ad hominem, but applies instead to preconceptions surrounding something's source or context.

Middle ground- Saying that a compromise, or middle point, between two extremes must be the truth.
Much of the time the truth does indeed lie between two extreme points, but this can bias our thinking, sometimes a thing is simply untrue and a compromise of it can also be untrue. Half way between truth and lie is still a lie.

_____________________________________________

I leave you with the link to the original. https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/ass...rHigherRes.jpg

Attached Images
File Type: jpg 1483220_718769974810683_97803309_n.jpg (82.9 KB, 96 views)

Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Unexisted

Senior Member

12-08-2013

I know a person that was kicked out of his house by his own parents when he was 12 years old, his parents said he had refuse to change and had hold devil's hand and said it was a sin. Now that's what happen when your too religious. They can ****k up peoples' mind sometime. I mean what's important than your own child?


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Ask Zyra

Senior Member

12-08-2013

okay Unexsisted, just because someone says Bible in the title doesn't mean that we shall speak of the dark lord here (that is a different thread). This thread is about just general courtesy that should be extended to people when arguing or debating. I will be bumping this religiously (again, not church talk a figure of speech))


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Unexisted

Senior Member

12-08-2013

I just had a bad day that's all.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Ask Zyra

Senior Member

12-08-2013

Before I go to bed BUMP!!!!!!!!


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Ask Tyrant Swain

Member

12-09-2013

So someone decided to do a list of ten logical fallacies you shouldn't commit?
Good.

TOO BAD THERE ARE AT LEAST TWENTY FOUR.

TWENTY -FU**ING- FOUR.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Saminus Maximus

Master Recruiter

12-09-2013

Quote:
So someone decided to do a list of ten logical fallacies you shouldn't commit?
Good.

TOO BAD THERE ARE AT LEAST TWENTY FOUR.

TWENTY -FU**ING- FOUR.
Those of you wondering what swain is talking about, here is the full list that most of the ones present are taken from.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Ask Zyra

Senior Member

12-09-2013

If I could read that small I would transcribe them onto the first post, but I can't so......


Also MORNING BUMP!!!!


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

FilFire

Senior Member

12-09-2013

https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/ass...rHigherRes.jpg

This should be intelligible enough.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Ask Zyra

Senior Member

12-09-2013

Thanks.... I'll get right on that.