Total Posts:9|Showing Posts:1-9
Jump to topic:

Common fallacies

DanT
Posts: 5,693
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/7/2013 8:52:51 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
Progressivism = Argumentum ad novitatem
Reform for the sake of Reform is fallacious

Conservatism = Argumentum ad antiquitatem
Opposing reform for the sake of tradition is fallacious

Statism = Argumentum ad verecundiam
Agreeing with someone just because they are in a position of authority (such as the USSC) is fallacious.

Democracy = Argumentum ad populum
Believing something is right just because allot of people believe it is fallacious. Bandwagon is also used in propaganda.
"Chemical weapons are no different than any other types of weapons."~Lordknukle
Wallstreetatheist
Posts: 7,132
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/7/2013 10:25:48 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
Applying critical reasoning to politics is not fair. You must think of the children!
DRUG HARM: http://imgur.com...
Primal Diet. Lifting. Reading. Psychedelics. Cold-Approach Pickup. Music.
Zaradi
Posts: 14,125
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/7/2013 10:29:41 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/7/2013 10:27:58 PM, FREEDO wrote:
Following this logic, all ideologies are based on logical fallacies.

Following this logic, ANARCHY!!!! ANARCHY!!!!
Want to debate? Pick a topic and hit me up! - http://www.debate.org...
Wallstreetatheist
Posts: 7,132
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/7/2013 10:36:21 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/7/2013 10:27:58 PM, FREEDO wrote:
Following this logic, all ideologies are based on logical fallacies.

He only listed four political ideologies. Your statement incurs substantial risk by applying his limited political ideological focus to all ideologies. Solution: increase the # of examples, draw relevant similarities between them all, and make the same conclusion.
DRUG HARM: http://imgur.com...
Primal Diet. Lifting. Reading. Psychedelics. Cold-Approach Pickup. Music.
Wallstreetatheist
Posts: 7,132
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/7/2013 10:38:10 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/7/2013 10:29:41 PM, Zaradi wrote:
At 3/7/2013 10:27:58 PM, FREEDO wrote:
Following this logic, all ideologies are based on logical fallacies.

Following this logic, ANARCHY!!!! ANARCHY!!!!

I'm sure FREEDO considers advocates of anarchy and voluntaryism ideological as well. I think he tries to maintain the pristine waters of his consciousness by preventing the polluting bias that any ideology injects.
DRUG HARM: http://imgur.com...
Primal Diet. Lifting. Reading. Psychedelics. Cold-Approach Pickup. Music.
Zaradi
Posts: 14,125
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/7/2013 10:45:47 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/7/2013 10:38:10 PM, Wallstreetatheist wrote:
At 3/7/2013 10:29:41 PM, Zaradi wrote:
At 3/7/2013 10:27:58 PM, FREEDO wrote:
Following this logic, all ideologies are based on logical fallacies.

Following this logic, ANARCHY!!!! ANARCHY!!!!

I'm sure FREEDO considers advocates of anarchy and voluntaryism ideological as well. I think he tries to maintain the pristine waters of his consciousness by preventing the polluting bias that any ideology injects.

And today we gather here in mourning, of what could've been an amazingly funny joke.
Want to debate? Pick a topic and hit me up! - http://www.debate.org...
OMGJustinBieber
Posts: 3,484
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/7/2013 11:05:06 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/7/2013 8:52:51 PM, DanT wrote:
Progressivism = Argumentum ad novitatem
Reform for the sake of Reform is fallacious

I don't feel progressives really fall victim to this one, if you asked a progressive whether something being "new" made it good as ad novitatem implies only the most unaware would say "yes." Progressives generally only advocate reforms when they see a problem with the hope of fixing it.

Conservatism = Argumentum ad antiquitatem
Opposing reform for the sake of tradition is fallacious

I'll agree with you here.

Statism = Argumentum ad verecundiam
Agreeing with someone just because they are in a position of authority (such as the USSC) is fallacious.

I have mixed feelings on this one, clearly some statists or even non-statists will you it, but I couldn't go further without concrete examples as to which arguments use it.

Democracy = Argumentum ad populum
Believing something is right just because allot of people believe it is fallacious. Bandwagon is also used in propaganda.

Are you saying democracy is based on a fallacy? Eh, a stronger defense of democracy is not that it aims at the right but that it aims to capture the general will in a system where no moral or metaphysical claims have dominance (besides the ones backing democracy perhaps.)
BigRat
Posts: 465
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/8/2013 2:52:12 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/7/2013 11:05:06 PM, OMGJustinBieber wrote:
At 3/7/2013 8:52:51 PM, DanT wrote:
Progressivism = Argumentum ad novitatem
Reform for the sake of Reform is fallacious

I don't feel progressives really fall victim to this one, if you asked a progressive whether something being "new" made it good as ad novitatem implies only the most unaware would say "yes." Progressives generally only advocate reforms when they see a problem with the hope of fixing it.

Progressives like to pretend that they are really "pragmatists". They aren't. Progressivism is knee jerk statism that calls for a massive state response to any problem.


Conservatism = Argumentum ad antiquitatem
Opposing reform for the sake of tradition is fallacious

I'll agree with you here.

Statism = Argumentum ad verecundiam
Agreeing with someone just because they are in a position of authority (such as the USSC) is fallacious.

I have mixed feelings on this one, clearly some statists or even non-statists will you it, but I couldn't go further without concrete examples as to which arguments use it.

Democracy = Argumentum ad populum
Believing something is right just because allot of people believe it is fallacious. Bandwagon is also used in propaganda.

Are you saying democracy is based on a fallacy? Eh, a stronger defense of democracy is not that it aims at the right but that it aims to capture the general will in a system where no moral or metaphysical claims have dominance (besides the ones backing democracy perhaps.)