Total Posts:13|Showing Posts:1-13
Jump to topic:

Which fallacy is this?

baggins
Posts: 855
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/25/2011 11:37:50 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
Today, we had a verbose gentleman harass everyone for three quarters of an hour with a dubious argument. The argument was outrageous, as it was quite obvious. However I am curious, is this kind of fallacy a variation of established fallacy? I have reduced the argument to an equivalent easier to understand form.

P1: Product A costs x.
P2: Product B costs y.
P3: Quality of A < Quality of B.
C: x < y.
The Holy Quran 29:19-20

See they not how Allah originates creation, then repeats it: truly that is easy for Allah.

Say: "Travel through the earth and see how Allah did originate creation; so will Allah produce a later creation: for Allah has power over all things.
Danielle
Posts: 21,330
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/25/2011 12:40:02 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 7/25/2011 11:37:50 AM, baggins wrote:
P1: Product A costs x.
P2: Product B costs y.
P3: Quality of A < Quality of B.
C: x < y.

I'm not sure this makes sense (and I know that's the point, but still).

A Gap shirt costs $40
A Banana Republic shirt costs $80
The quality of the Gap shirt is less than the quality of the B.R. shirt
Conclusion: $40 is less than $80 ??? (no sh!t)

If that's really what you're trying to express, then I'd say maybe it's a non sequitur...?
President of DDO
mongeese
Posts: 5,387
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/25/2011 12:53:33 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
It's based on the unstated assumption that lower quality means lower price, which means it is either inductive fallacy or non sequitur.
baggins
Posts: 855
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/25/2011 12:59:25 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 7/25/2011 12:40:02 PM, Danielle wrote:
At 7/25/2011 11:37:50 AM, baggins wrote:
P1: Product A costs x.
P2: Product B costs y.
P3: Quality of A < Quality of B.
C: x < y.

I'm not sure this makes sense (and I know that's the point, but still).

A Gap shirt costs $40
A Banana Republic shirt costs $80
The quality of the Gap shirt is less than the quality of the B.R. shirt
Conclusion: $40 is less than $80 ??? (no sh!t)

If that's really what you're trying to express, then I'd say maybe it's a non sequitur...?

More or less. The actual argument was:

The cheapest Gap shirt costs $40
The cheapest Banana Republic shirt costs $40
The quality of cheapest Gap shirt is less than the quality of cheapest B.R. shirt (For a particular purpose)
Contradiction, $40 is not less than $40. Gap shirt should be cheaper
Give me money to research cheaper Gap shirts.

Oh, he was talking about algorithms, not T shirts.
The Holy Quran 29:19-20

See they not how Allah originates creation, then repeats it: truly that is easy for Allah.

Say: "Travel through the earth and see how Allah did originate creation; so will Allah produce a later creation: for Allah has power over all things.
baggins
Posts: 855
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/25/2011 1:07:25 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 7/25/2011 12:23:18 PM, Rockylightning wrote:
Quality =/= price.

Good enough. However, it leads to further arguments. Inductive fallacy or non sequitur would have worked for me better. It would have forced him to go to the internet later on, wondering what it is!

Logic is not a part of Indian school curricula. I am wondering if I can use fallacies to ambush some voluble people. If they don't know what it is, they can't defend it! If they ask me, I will begin a lecture on logic and take my time on it! :)
The Holy Quran 29:19-20

See they not how Allah originates creation, then repeats it: truly that is easy for Allah.

Say: "Travel through the earth and see how Allah did originate creation; so will Allah produce a later creation: for Allah has power over all things.
baggins
Posts: 855
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/25/2011 1:13:13 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 7/25/2011 1:01:15 PM, Danielle wrote:
Argument by generalization; Argument by selective observation?

Not sure. Price depends on purpose, and the whole discussion was about this purpose only. Gap shirt is low quality and expensive for this. So all that happens it - we don't use it for that purpose!
The Holy Quran 29:19-20

See they not how Allah originates creation, then repeats it: truly that is easy for Allah.

Say: "Travel through the earth and see how Allah did originate creation; so will Allah produce a later creation: for Allah has power over all things.
RoyLatham
Posts: 4,488
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/25/2011 1:55:35 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
I go with non sequitur.

It's a bad idea to use debate jargon in ordinary civilian life. It sends the message that you think you are smarter than the other person, but you are refusing to say why. Even in a debate, it's not a good practice because it's inviting people to identify the fallacy in the argument and construct their own argument as to why it fits the definition. Best just to say "It doesn't follow that ... blah, blah ..."
darkkermit
Posts: 11,204
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/25/2011 2:22:30 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
P1: Product A costs x.
P2: Product B costs y.
P3: Quality of A < Quality of B.
C: x < y.

If the argument was the following:
P1: A = x
P2: B = y
P3: A < B
C: x <y
then it would be correct.

However, it is absurd statement since the first two premises uses "Product A" while the third round uses "Quality of A", two different measurements.

Stating that "The quality of A is equal to its cost" is a nonsense statement since quality is subjective. Quality =/= cost. I think DDO is a quality website, yet its cost is free. I think Jersey Shore is a piece of sh!t, yet it costs money to buy the jersey shore CDs.

Pricing of items is based on supply and demand.
Open borders debate:
http://www.debate.org...
belle
Posts: 4,113
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/25/2011 2:28:44 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 7/25/2011 11:37:50 AM, baggins wrote:
Today, we had a verbose gentleman harass everyone for three quarters of an hour with a dubious argument. The argument was outrageous, as it was quite obvious. However I am curious, is this kind of fallacy a variation of established fallacy? I have reduced the argument to an equivalent easier to understand form.

P1: Product A costs x.
P2: Product B costs y.
P3: Quality of A < Quality of B.
C: x < y.

that depends. all other things being equal, it might be the case. otherwise there are too many variables that could effect this. i think its pretty well established that people are willing to pay more for something if they believe it to be higher quality, but thats irrelevant if people don't know the quality of the two objects, if one is much harder to obtain than the other, etc.
evidently i only come to ddo to avoid doing homework...
baggins
Posts: 855
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/28/2011 10:02:15 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 7/25/2011 1:55:35 PM, RoyLatham wrote:
It's a bad idea to use debate jargon in ordinary civilian life..."

It is a perfectly good idea for disorienting a person who speaks too much without listening to you. I agree it is mildly offensive - that is what it is intended to be. Arguing too much and too long is a problem endemic to my countrymen. This is coupled with taking offense if they are interrupted directly - specially if they happen to be older. I routinely use sudden digressions to escape from such situation.
The Holy Quran 29:19-20

See they not how Allah originates creation, then repeats it: truly that is easy for Allah.

Say: "Travel through the earth and see how Allah did originate creation; so will Allah produce a later creation: for Allah has power over all things.