Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

7 Pages « < 3 4 5 6 7 >Bottom

Outline · [ Standard ] · Linear+

> Let me teach you Logical Thinking and Fallacies, to debunk False Arguments

views
     
9m2w
post Jun 18 2021, 01:28 PM

Victoria Concordia Crescit
*****
Junior Member
906 posts

Joined: Feb 2007


QUOTE(lowya @ Jun 17 2021, 07:00 PM)
next, very popular in this forum

CONFIRMATION BIAS ARGUMENT: making argument that depends on their personal bias/EXPERIENCE, ignoring other facts that their (isolated) personal experience is not a fact or reality to others (Similar to cherry picking based on experience or confirmation)

Racists often has Confirmation Bias because their prejudice formed over the years mixing with other racist people, CONFIRMED by their friends or family since young. In reality, their personal network is a reflection of themselves if they exposed a lot to negative people, which has nothing to do with race.

That's why,
"Never argue with stupid people, they will drag you down to their level and then beat you with EXPERIENCE." ― Mark Twain
*
Curious

Would googling and citing (or rather cherry picking) articles and research that supports your argument be considered this? As opposed to holistically researching on the topic?
SUSlowya
post Jun 18 2021, 01:45 PM

Look at all my stars!!
*******
Senior Member
4,821 posts

Joined: Mar 2009

QUOTE(9m2w @ Jun 18 2021, 01:28 PM)
Curious

Would googling and citing (or rather cherry picking) articles and research that supports your argument be considered this? As opposed to holistically researching on the topic?
*
you mentioned a very valid point.

it's healthy to bring forth all counter views in the beginning, cherry picking or not, fallacy or not, in the end, the conclusion is often a personal choice.

we know one man's meat is another man's poison, likewise, one person's fact is another person fake news. The social media has evolve to this extend and i have no choice but to put it this way.

As i often said, there is no truth, there is only (scientific or etc) facts.

Bear in mind that today's fact can be tomorrow's fiction, that's how open minded we should be when it comes to critical thinking, don't ended up a critically narcissistic person, also aware that mistake is part of learning journey, nothing to be ashamed of.
SUSlowya
post Jun 23 2021, 09:12 AM

Look at all my stars!!
*******
Senior Member
4,821 posts

Joined: Mar 2009

QUOTE(Avangelice @ Jun 23 2021, 08:49 AM)
Tell me lah which external auditor will simply report to sc without any valid reason.
*
appeal to authority (auditor) fallacy is real.
Ruris
post Jun 23 2021, 09:56 AM

New Member
*
Junior Member
47 posts

Joined: Oct 2020


Hmm, filters based on accepted (business) practices, corporate experiences, these are fine.

While TS intentions seems positive, you can spent all your time trying to fit someone's statement into one of those fallacies and you would probably find some excuses to do so. It's a 'fallacy' of its own.

SUSlowya
post Jun 23 2021, 12:21 PM

Look at all my stars!!
*******
Senior Member
4,821 posts

Joined: Mar 2009

QUOTE(Ruris @ Jun 23 2021, 09:56 AM)
Hmm, filters based on accepted (business) practices, corporate experiences, these are fine.

While TS intentions seems positive, you can spent all your time trying to fit someone's statement into one of those fallacies and you would probably find some excuses to do so. It's a 'fallacy' of its own.
*
for case studies, i don't have time to do all, you can contribute for learning purpose, this is in no way to rebuke your belief system, as i don't think it's possible to change how one thinks, but the purpose is rather to identify which are the fallacies to avoid from wasting time arguing.
fraudcommission
post Jun 23 2021, 05:40 PM

New Member
*
Junior Member
8 posts

Joined: Jul 2020
park
fuzzy
post Jun 23 2021, 06:01 PM

*pew pew pew*
*******
Senior Member
6,103 posts

Joined: Jan 2003

QUOTE(diffyhelman2 @ Jun 14 2021, 06:38 PM)
Example
Hesitant guy
I have concerns about vaccine xyz because i read the risk of suffering from abcd is much more likely compared to the  risk of me falling seriously ill from been unvaccinated.

Strawman critic argument: omg why are you been such an antivaxx boomer who believes whatever fake news you read on WhatsApp. Vaccines do not reprogram your dna!

Strawman critic premises his whole argument on hesitant guy been an anti vaxxer while not addressing the core issue of his concern which is the risk benefit ratio of taking the vaccine.  He also brings in another strawman  by  asserting that  the hesitant guy believes that vaccines reprogram his dna.
*
Actually not entirely right.

Strawman attacks are more on taking certain points of the argument and distorting or twisting it to make it look worse.

Based on example above - the strawman would more be like "So you think all vaccines make you ill? You think those that had polio was pretending only right and the polio vaccine is fake also right? You believe Government all put 5G chip to control you also?"

So suddenly from someone who is trying to ascertain the validity of a vaccine, you take a part of it and twist it to the point he looks like a unsympathetic conspiracy loving nutjob thus have no credibility.
diffyhelman2
post Jun 23 2021, 06:07 PM

Casual
***
Junior Member
476 posts

Joined: Apr 2019
QUOTE(fuzzy @ Jun 23 2021, 06:01 PM)
Actually not entirely right.

Strawman attacks are more on taking certain points of the argument and distorting or twisting it to make it look worse.

Based on example above - the strawman would more be like "So you think all vaccines make you ill? You think those that had polio was pretending only right and the polio vaccine is fake also right? You believe Government all put 5G chip to control you also?"

So suddenly from someone who is trying to ascertain the validity of a vaccine, you take a part of it and twist it to the point he looks like a unsympathetic conspiracy loving nutjob thus have no credibility.
*
I think best to think of strawman as taking an argument and then twisting original context or intention of the argument into a weaker argument, thus making it easier to attack. like they say, attacking a strawman. your example is a very obvious one, but they are more subtle ways to twist an argument to make the argument weaker.


fuzzy
post Jun 23 2021, 06:11 PM

*pew pew pew*
*******
Senior Member
6,103 posts

Joined: Jan 2003

QUOTE(diffyhelman2 @ Jun 23 2021, 06:07 PM)
I think best to think of strawman as taking an argument and then twisting original context or intention of the argument into a weaker argument, thus making it easier to attack. like they say, attacking a strawman. your example is a very obvious one, but they are more subtle ways to twist an argument to make the argument weaker.
*
Yep, but that is the point of strawman argument, to make the opposition's view look weak or bad by applying it liberally.

For example, the example you quote where the fella said didn't know take vaccine means can live forever is also a strawman, because the original argument didn't nor even is meant to convey that.

Edit: The example you use falls into And Hominem, where you attack the person or the belief of the person rather than the context of the argument to weaken their stance on things.

This post has been edited by fuzzy: Jun 23 2021, 06:12 PM
SUSlowya
post Jun 23 2021, 08:21 PM

Look at all my stars!!
*******
Senior Member
4,821 posts

Joined: Mar 2009

QUOTE(fuzzy @ Jun 23 2021, 06:11 PM)
Yep, but that is the point of strawman argument, to make the opposition's view look weak or bad by applying it liberally.

For example, the example you quote where the fella said didn't know take vaccine means can live forever is also a strawman, because the original argument didn't nor even is meant to convey that.

Edit: The example you use falls into And Hominem, where you attack the person or the belief of the person rather than the context of the argument to weaken their stance on things.
*
The straw man fallacy works by having someone attempt to defeat an argument that you are not making, but that may be somewhat related to your actual argument.

probably the #1 fallacy out there.

one thing to add is fallacy is critical thinking logic404, it's neither talking about fact, but rather the acceptability of the logical process of the argument.

when we debunk a fallacy, we did not say what you argue is right or wrong, we simply said your argument doesn't make any sense to begin with, so there is no point to waste time to fact check because they person is not even talking to the point.

keep it going guys.
SUSlowya
post Jun 23 2021, 08:26 PM

Look at all my stars!!
*******
Senior Member
4,821 posts

Joined: Mar 2009

Let's up the ante further,

Argumentum ad populum (Bandwagon Fallacy)

The bandwagon fallacy works by having someone conform beliefs that are based on the popularity of their position. People who use this fallacy will attribute the popularity of their belief to also be validation to its truthfulness. Instead of conforming their belief based on evidence, they will instead be convinced that if the majority of people believe something to be true, then it must therefore be true.

Example:

Sam: Why are you a Christian?

Julian: Well, there are over 2 billion Christians in the world. How can all those people be wrong? I'd rather side with the majority than with a fringe group of nonbelievers.

Ever heard of monkey see monkey do? well, contrary to the fallacy of majority is always right, the outcome of decision making of the majority often disappointing, because majority takes the simple route of non-questioning, only minority choose the difficult route of questioning will understand this, btw don't mistaken rebellious for questioning.

user posted image
diffyhelman2
post Jun 27 2021, 01:05 AM

Casual
***
Junior Member
476 posts

Joined: Apr 2019
QUOTE(AdrianaMaisarah @ Jun 26 2021, 10:43 PM)
But my tiny sock also got people produce it.
How come universe no one create it?
*
I would say this is the argument by design controversy, I dont know if it can be definitely called a fallacy.

On the larger issue of that TS topic, he falls into the divine fallacy argument.

ie, the Universe is so amazing, I cannot imagine it could have come into its own by itself without a creator.


SUSlowya
post Jun 27 2021, 07:48 AM

Look at all my stars!!
*******
Senior Member
4,821 posts

Joined: Mar 2009

QUOTE(diffyhelman2 @ Jun 27 2021, 01:05 AM)
I would say this is the argument by design controversy, I dont know if it can be definitely called a fallacy.

On the larger issue of that TS topic, he falls into the divine fallacy argument.

ie, the Universe is so amazing, I cannot imagine it could have come into its own by itself without a creator.
*
“But my tiny sock also got people produce it.
How come universe no one create it?”

above is either a Red Herring Fallacy (if it was intended to argue) or just a Rhetoric (if it wasn't intended to argue).

A red herring is something that misleads or distracts from a relevant or important question. It may be either a logical fallacy or a literary device that leads readers or audiences toward a false conclusion. A red herring may be used intentionally, as in mystery fiction or as part of rhetorical strategies, or may be used in argumentation inadvertently.

When you see such kind of out of topic argument, just walk away cause they are deep in their own world.
SUSlowya
post Jun 27 2021, 08:01 AM

Look at all my stars!!
*******
Senior Member
4,821 posts

Joined: Mar 2009

actual example from a thread title: "If there's no God, how come this thing so amazing."

it's a critical thinking sin to commit appeal to ignorant fallacy (with a twist of confusion of correlation and causation), but some people live through this their entire life. No amount of formal education can help to fix this.
6942nole
post Jun 27 2021, 08:16 AM

Getting Started
**
Junior Member
140 posts

Joined: Jan 2021
can these be part of labelism during discussion?
the irony is labelism itself is also a labelism.


SUSlowya
post Jun 27 2021, 08:32 AM

Look at all my stars!!
*******
Senior Member
4,821 posts

Joined: Mar 2009

QUOTE(6942nole @ Jun 27 2021, 08:16 AM)
can these be part of labelism during discussion?
the irony is labelism itself is also a labelism.
*
we're talking about identifying types of fallacies (of argument) here and yes we need label for that matter, but no ad hominem (to anyone) specifically used to anyone at all here. Hope you can tell the difference.
6942nole
post Jun 27 2021, 09:21 AM

Getting Started
**
Junior Member
140 posts

Joined: Jan 2021
QUOTE(lowya @ Jun 27 2021, 08:32 AM)
we're talking about identifying types of fallacies (of argument) here and yes we need label for that matter, but no ad hominem (to anyone) specifically used to anyone at all here. Hope you can tell the difference.
*
yes, but anything has nuance on it. if we identified opponent argument with types of fallacies and end the argument, we fall into labelism shit as well.
SUSlowya
post Jun 27 2021, 09:48 AM

Look at all my stars!!
*******
Senior Member
4,821 posts

Joined: Mar 2009

QUOTE(6942nole @ Jun 27 2021, 09:21 AM)
yes, but anything has nuance on it. if we identified opponent argument with types of fallacies and end the argument, we fall into labelism shit as well.
*
that's why you use scientific facts (big statistical data) instead of personal opinion to argue, but let me tell you science is an open acknowledgement that new data could nullify it's previous findings, being wrong is science.

Again, fallacy of argument is not about being right or wrong factually, but from the critical thinking standpoint it's simply to address the issue of whether it's logical or not. And when you establish that it's not logical, it's not worth your time to pursue.
SUSsickjoker
post Jun 27 2021, 10:15 AM

Getting Started
**
Junior Member
179 posts

Joined: Apr 2020

QUOTE(lowya @ Jun 27 2021, 09:48 AM)
that's why you use scientific facts (big statistical data) instead of personal opinion to argue, but let me tell you science is an open acknowledgement that new data could nullify it's previous findings, being wrong is science.

Again, fallacy of argument is not about being right or wrong factually, but from the critical thinking standpoint it's simply to address the issue of whether it's logical or not. And when you establish that it's not logical, it's not worth your time to pursue.
*
How you know the scientific data is real.

Do you know what is common sense?
SUSlowya
post Jun 27 2021, 10:33 AM

Look at all my stars!!
*******
Senior Member
4,821 posts

Joined: Mar 2009

QUOTE(sickjoker @ Jun 27 2021, 10:15 AM)
How you know the scientific data is real.

Do you know what is common sense?
*
in science it's not about real or false, it's about how Applicable the Big Data is in our world for better mankind. Best given example is looking at RRR vs ARR, which in this example ARR is more relevant for practical reason, but i shall not diverge into statistics (or vaccination etc, which can only serves as example but not the main discussion here).

Common Sense is an accumulation of collective understanding of what one has studied and understood previously therefore formed an opinion, one person's common sense is not common to another person, it could be common to you but uncommon to others. Incidentally, this is also not the topic of discussion here too. I sense something from your nick handle, but it turns out true later on, i shall not hesitate to be less polite.

Essentially, Fallacies serve the purpose as the Rules of Engagement in debates, but if the person who argue not even knowing what is fallacy, it's not worth the engagement and argument should be avoided at all cost.

This post has been edited by lowya: Jun 27 2021, 10:40 AM

7 Pages « < 3 4 5 6 7 >Top
 

Change to:
| Lo-Fi Version
0.0257sec    0.80    5 queries    GZIP Disabled
Time is now: 28th September 2021 - 01:33 PM