Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

Outline · [ Standard ] · Linear+

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

views
     
SUSlowya
post Jun 14 2021, 02:37 PM, updated 2 months ago

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

Joined: Mar 2009

First, quote me an actual example of this forum's statement that you find ridiculous or disagree totally, i'll cross reference it to the book of fallacies and invalidate their illogical arguments.

Let me start with the famous one you already know so i spare you the #1 example, this forum is full of name callings, i.e.

1. Ad Hominem.

2. (more added in the thread, read on)

There are at least 30 Fallacies, let's see if we can cover it all here.

So start paste the actual quote here, i'll reply and we can learn together.

This post has been edited by lowya: Jun 17 2021, 08:55 AM
internaldisputes
post Jun 14 2021, 04:45 PM

he/his/him
******
Senior Member
1,723 posts

Joined: Oct 2010
Interesting...

QUOTE(kraziekd @ Jun 14 2021, 11:28 AM)
i dun see u inviting them living in ur house but tokok here n there on twitter
*
What do you think of this argument? (Context: The Rohingya issue) sweat.gif
brkli
post Jun 14 2021, 04:51 PM

Getting Started
**
Junior Member
298 posts

Joined: Oct 2018

Jun 14 2021, 09:38 PM
This post has been deleted by lowya because: meh

diffyhelman2
post Jun 14 2021, 05:19 PM

Casual
***
Junior Member
476 posts

Joined: Apr 2019
park, lazy to go find examples now but the top ones are:

appeal to authority

strawman

non sequitur

appeal to emotion/fear, scaremongering

This post has been edited by diffyhelman2: Jun 14 2021, 05:24 PM
diffyhelman2
post Jun 14 2021, 05:22 PM

Casual
***
Junior Member
476 posts

Joined: Apr 2019
QUOTE(internaldisputes @ Jun 14 2021, 04:45 PM)
Interesting...
What do you think of this argument? (Context: The Rohingya issue) sweat.gif
*
I think this one falls under strawman? He's not addressing the real issue of inhumane but derailing with "why dont you take care of all of them"?

Maybe also falls under whataboutism?
blueq01
post Jun 14 2021, 05:34 PM

New Member
*
Newbie
27 posts

Joined: Jul 2013


I don't know this one falls under which psychology term but those with strong ideology just can't assess facts objectively when it comes to race, politics and religion. For example, genuine macai, us/cn licker and religious nut.
erizdagreat
post Jun 14 2021, 05:35 PM

Getting Started
**
Junior Member
88 posts

Joined: Aug 2012


I'm not sure if this is one of the fallacies you mentioned, but an argument logic that I like to use is reductio ad absurdum.

This is when you take a claim and show that by extending that claim to its conclusion would result in an absurd outcome, thus proving the claim false.

Please do share more. =)
JohnL77
post Jun 14 2021, 06:12 PM

Regular
******
Senior Member
1,241 posts

Joined: Mar 2013



QUOTE(diffyhelman2 @ Jun 14 2021, 05:19 PM)
park, lazy to go find examples now but the top ones are:

appeal to authority

strawman

non sequitur

appeal to emotion/fear, scaremongering
*
Ad hominems.

That EinBaja really like to use.
SUSslimey
post Jun 14 2021, 06:20 PM


*******
Senior Member
6,914 posts

Joined: Apr 2007

Just look at all the religious arguments.
Sichiri
post Jun 14 2021, 06:26 PM

Regular
******
Senior Member
1,157 posts

Joined: Jan 2003
From: Kepong, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.



I still don't fully understand what is a strawman
diffyhelman2
post Jun 14 2021, 06:38 PM

Casual
***
Junior Member
476 posts

Joined: Apr 2019
QUOTE(Sichiri @ Jun 14 2021, 06:26 PM)
I still don't fully understand what is a strawman
*
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.

This post has been edited by diffyhelman2: Jun 14 2021, 06:44 PM
Imp Bron
post Jun 14 2021, 06:53 PM

Getting Started
**
Junior Member
112 posts

Joined: Aug 2014
Binary thinking, also known as dichotomous thinking, happens when even complex concepts, ideas, and problems are overly simplified into being one side or another. The gray area in the middle is ignored or goes unnoticed.

These people think in black and white, if you not support X then you must support Y. No somewhere in between
ericangtzeann
post Jun 14 2021, 06:59 PM

New Member
*
Newbie
36 posts

Joined: Jan 2019


Afraid of ad hominem please don't get online, thats something this forum has taught me.
AmenoJaku
post Jun 14 2021, 07:25 PM

New Member
*
Junior Member
32 posts

Joined: Jul 2013
Good thread. Park.
Ruris
post Jun 14 2021, 07:45 PM

New Member
*
Junior Member
47 posts

Joined: Oct 2020


Very fast tips /filter to see if the person replying to you is a troll/psycho.
You describe a situation in very precise manner.

The opposing person reply with "so, you're saying" or straight away use an analogy despite having no reason to do so as you're not describing quantum mechanics.
rtk74
post Jun 14 2021, 08:05 PM

;"K]6pKBg;1]U)uSs!eF
****
Junior Member
585 posts

Joined: Jun 2013
From: Aboveground



TLDR

user posted image
SleepingDragon
post Jun 14 2021, 08:26 PM

Getting Started
**
Junior Member
163 posts

Joined: Jan 2003
Survivorship Bias

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Survivorship_bias


Please read the wikipedia for explanation, I provide some examples:

1. I play shares/crypto. Sometimes I win sometimes I lose money. I only tell ppl (or post on lowyat forum) when I make money. Then everyone thinks I make money all the time.

2. I get rejected 9 out of 10 girls I approach. But I approached 100 girls (get rejected 90 times) and still dapat 10 girls so i'm seen in public for some of the 10 girls. My rejections are not shown to the public. So ppl think i'm a playboy PUA expert.

3. Girls think that every guy is a playboy, but they only think about guys in top 10% and they think the rest of the 90% don't exist and therefore doesn't register in their head. So they think every guy (which is the 10%) is a playboy (because the top 10% can dapat multiple girls).

This post has been edited by SleepingDragon: Jun 14 2021, 08:27 PM
orangtua
post Jun 14 2021, 08:38 PM

Getting Started
**
Junior Member
79 posts

Joined: Jul 2006
Problem with our education system is it doesn't teach this in school. Heck not even in uni (at least not in mine). Instead we spend time on Pendidikan Moral.
AbbyCom
post Jun 14 2021, 09:30 PM

Getting Started
**
Junior Member
83 posts

Joined: Mar 2020
QUOTE(orangtua @ Jun 14 2021, 08:38 PM)
Problem with our education system is it doesn't teach this in school. Heck not even in uni (at least not in mine). Instead we spend time on Pendidikan Moral.
*
Yeah, that's very good observation, I have no idea these fallacies exist and I am guilty of them too. Where do you guys find out about this?
SUSlowya
post Jun 14 2021, 09:44 PM

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

Joined: Mar 2009

QUOTE(internaldisputes @ Jun 14 2021, 04:45 PM)
Interesting...
What do you think of this argument? (Context: The Rohingya issue) sweat.gif
*
"i dun see u inviting them living in ur house but tokok here n there on twitter"

is a Straw Man Argument (Concocting a false or made up scenario and then attacking that scenario in order to make an opponent look bad.
diffyhelman2
post Jun 14 2021, 09:46 PM

Casual
***
Junior Member
476 posts

Joined: Apr 2019
QUOTE(AbbyCom @ Jun 14 2021, 09:30 PM)
Yeah, that's very good observation, I have no idea these fallacies exist and I am guilty of them too. Where do you guys find out about this?
*
wikipedia is a good starting point
SUSlowya
post Jun 14 2021, 09:48 PM

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

Joined: Mar 2009

QUOTE(blueq01 @ Jun 14 2021, 05:34 PM)
I don't know this one falls under which psychology term but those with strong ideology just can't assess facts objectively when it comes to race, politics and religion. For example, genuine macai, us/cn licker and religious nut.
*
Good example, that is Appeal To Authority Argument.

Debating with them is usually a waste of time.
lazer19
post Jun 14 2021, 09:51 PM

New Member
*
Newbie
33 posts

Joined: Nov 2015


How about red herring TS? I often confused it with strawman
cekpome
post Jun 14 2021, 09:51 PM

New Member
*
Junior Member
11 posts

Joined: Apr 2019


https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/
SUSlowya
post Jun 14 2021, 09:51 PM

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

Joined: Mar 2009

QUOTE(erizdagreat @ Jun 14 2021, 05:35 PM)
I'm not sure if this is one of the fallacies you mentioned, but an argument logic that I like to use is reductio ad absurdum.

This is when you take a claim and show that by extending that claim to its conclusion would result in an absurd outcome, thus proving the claim false.

Please do share more. =)
*
Paste the actual argument here, we shall cross examine it later.
brkli
post Jun 14 2021, 09:54 PM

Getting Started
**
Junior Member
298 posts

Joined: Oct 2018
QUOTE(lowya @ Jun 14 2021, 02:37 PM)
First, quote me an actual example of this forum's statement that you find ridiculous or disagree totally, i'll cross reference it to the book of fallacies and invalidate their illogical arguments.

*
hrm.... how about this??

QUOTE(lowya @ Jun 9 2021, 08:28 AM)
there are no dumb politicians, there are only dumb voters.
*
SUSlowya
post Jun 14 2021, 09:55 PM

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

Joined: Mar 2009

QUOTE(Imp Bron @ Jun 14 2021, 06:53 PM)
Binary thinking, also known as dichotomous thinking, happens when even complex concepts, ideas, and problems are overly simplified into being one side or another. The gray area in the middle is ignored or goes unnoticed.

These people think in black and white, if you not support X then you must support Y. No somewhere in between
*
and they often present False Dilemma Fallacy as their argument.

Example: You can either get married or forever be alone.

Classic person of reference is puchongite who cannot tolerate gray area, they think of the world as Black or White.
diffyhelman2
post Jun 14 2021, 09:55 PM

Casual
***
Junior Member
476 posts

Joined: Apr 2019
QUOTE(lazer19 @ Jun 14 2021, 09:51 PM)
How about red herring TS? I often confused it with strawman
*
I think a strawman fallacy occurs when someone twists our words to use against us, while a red herring is when someone uses an irrelevant point in a debate in order to distract, derail or confuse the topic.

strawman - a false representation of your opponents argument that is easier to attack

red herring - an irrelevant point thrown into the argument

Many arguments contain both strawman and red herring at the same time so thats why we often confuse the two.

This post has been edited by diffyhelman2: Jun 14 2021, 09:58 PM
SUSlowya
post Jun 14 2021, 09:57 PM

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

Joined: Mar 2009

QUOTE(ericangtzeann @ Jun 14 2021, 06:59 PM)
Afraid of ad hominem please don't get online, thats something this forum has taught me.
*
to me it's more like afraid of wasting time with people that don't matter, or little people.
diffyhelman2
post Jun 14 2021, 09:58 PM

Casual
***
Junior Member
476 posts

Joined: Apr 2019
QUOTE(lowya @ Jun 14 2021, 09:57 PM)
to me it's more like afraid of wasting time with people that don't matter, or little people.
*
Another way to look at it is...if they can only resort to ad hominems instead of attacking your points, you must be onto something.
SUSlowya
post Jun 14 2021, 10:00 PM

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

Joined: Mar 2009

QUOTE(Ruris @ Jun 14 2021, 07:45 PM)
Very fast tips /filter to see if the person replying to you is a troll/psycho.
You describe a situation in very precise manner.

The opposing person reply with "so, you're saying" or straight away use an analogy despite having no reason to do so as you're not describing quantum mechanics.
*
If "so, you're saying" is followed by exaggerated consequential event, the it's a Slippery Slope Argument/Fallacy e.g. without vaccination we will all be in trouble.
jojojoget
post Jun 14 2021, 10:04 PM

Getting Started
**
Junior Member
51 posts

Joined: Nov 2020
Also don't forget the fallacy fallacy, just because an argument contains a logical fallacy doesn't mean it can't be true, it's just that the structure of the argument is faulty. The worth of logical fallacies in public forums is that when people respond to your opinion you can sift through it and identify which is a valid critique and which is wasting your time, ignore the fallacies and focus on the rest.
SUSlowya
post Jun 14 2021, 10:10 PM

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

Joined: Mar 2009

QUOTE(lazer19 @ Jun 14 2021, 09:51 PM)
How about red herring TS? I often confused it with strawman
*
Red Herring is diverting attention by arguing on different subject by avoiding head on discussion.

Strawman is made up an (defend-less) strawman scenario and attack the straw-man (instead attack the real man/issue)

There is also a 3rd scenario i.e. Missing The Point, in which the opponent has comprehension failure, quite often here.
culvers
post Jun 14 2021, 10:12 PM

Getting Started
**
Junior Member
70 posts

Joined: Feb 2017
Out of so many fallacy, IMO, the worst one is ad hominem, especially on the internet.

The next one is appeal to authority because in /k everyone thinks they’re some kind of expert or big shot.

Then there’s appeal to emotion. These stupid people like to argue by saying “what if it happens to you or your family?”. Totally brainless zombies not using their head to think.

Edit: Actually the one I hated the most is burden of proof fallacy. These idiots who keep asking you to provide evidence to disapprove their claim.

This post has been edited by culvers: Jun 14 2021, 10:17 PM
SUSlowya
post Jun 14 2021, 10:13 PM

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

Joined: Mar 2009

QUOTE(brkli @ Jun 14 2021, 09:54 PM)
hrm.... how about this??
*
"there are no dumb politicians, there are only dumb voters."

is simply a logical cause and effect thinking, majority do no know how to vote is a fact, hence we kept repeating the same political mistake over and over again.

Other than voting, there is no much you can do about it, there is no option 2 to correct the system.
mmusang
post Jun 14 2021, 10:21 PM

Enthusiast
*****
Senior Member
961 posts

Joined: Mar 2006
From: Proud of Kelantan
burden of proof
example:
people who make a claim need to give proof.
usually atheist claim god not exist => they also need to provide proof
believer said god exist => also need to provide proof.

usually when u communicate with atheist, they will said we/believer need to provide proof,
actually both need to provide base on their claims, watever it is.
SUSlowya
post Jun 14 2021, 10:32 PM

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

Joined: Mar 2009

QUOTE(mmusang @ Jun 14 2021, 10:21 PM)
burden of proof
example:
people who make a claim need to give proof.
usually atheist claim god not exist => they also need to provide proof
believer said god exist => also need to provide proof.

usually when u communicate with atheist, they will said we/believer need to provide proof,
actually both need to provide base on their claims, watever it is.
*
In court, those who say it exist need to proof simple as that.

Say the defendant claimed did not commit crime, the prosecutor require to present the evidence, not the other way round.

The judge will dismiss the case in the event of insufficient evidence.

The hypothesis of the existence of god will be dismissed too with the claimer's lack of evidence.

Related: Hypothesis (no data) vs Theory (proven with data)
mmusang
post Jun 14 2021, 10:49 PM

Enthusiast
*****
Senior Member
961 posts

Joined: Mar 2006
From: Proud of Kelantan
QUOTE(lowya @ Jun 14 2021, 10:32 PM)
In court, those who say it exist need to proof simple as that.

Say the defendant claimed did not commit crime, the prosecutor require to present the evidence, not the other way round.

The judge will dismiss the case in the event of insufficient evidence.

The hypothesis of the existence of god will be dismissed too with the claimer's lack of evidence.

Related: Hypothesis (no data) vs Theory (proven with data)
*
lets go to court..

The Prosecutor Accused(claim) the defendant A commit crime at time X at location Y. it is not the other way around.
depends on prosecutor, if they present enough evidence, the defendant will need to give their evidence(argument) as well.
when the first hearing, the defendant will hear Accusation but never about his claim/saying.

marfccy
post Jun 14 2021, 10:53 PM

Le Ponyland!!!
*******
Senior Member
3,987 posts

Joined: Nov 2011



QUOTE(rtk74 @ Jun 14 2021, 08:05 PM)
TLDR

user posted image
*
niceee
SUSLyu
post Jun 14 2021, 11:04 PM

Enthusiast
*****
Junior Member
771 posts

Joined: Jan 2015



QUOTE(rtk74 @ Jun 14 2021, 08:05 PM)
TLDR

user posted image
*
Interesting but too deep for unker

Need a kindergarten example for understanding
Raexim
post Jun 14 2021, 11:14 PM

New Member
*
Newbie
42 posts

Joined: Aug 2016
I see many long threads with 2 people arguing are often ad hominem or tu quoque.
Often they are either insulting each other or criticizing each other.
ClessRV
post Jun 14 2021, 11:15 PM

On my way
****
Junior Member
627 posts

Joined: Jan 2006
QUOTE(Lyu @ Jun 14 2021, 11:04 PM)
Interesting but too deep for unker

Need a kindergarten example for understanding
*
QUOTE(cekpome @ Jun 14 2021, 09:51 PM)
can go to the site as well, same as the image, but should be better if the image seems too cluttered.
SUSlowya
post Jun 14 2021, 11:24 PM

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

Joined: Mar 2009

QUOTE(mmusang @ Jun 14 2021, 10:49 PM)
lets go to court..

The Prosecutor Accused(claim) the defendant A commit crime at time X at location Y. it is not the other way around.
depends on prosecutor, if they present enough evidence, the defendant will need to give their evidence(argument) as well.
when the first hearing, the defendant will hear Accusation but never about his claim/saying.
*
basically the prosecutor (say police) has the evidence (of drug) need to first present the evidence (drug) to prosecute the accused. So the claimer (who said the accused has drug) need to to do proof first. However, it's another topic later on for the accused to counter the claim, but we are now talking about the person who are liable to FIRST prove it's existence of proof is the claimer.

In religion term, the believer must have FIRST present the evidence of god instead of asking nons to do it. AFTER believer proved it, the the nons can argue later otherwise. However if believe can't even prove first, what is there to argue about?

anyway, let's stop it right here, and give other people to chance to ask without derailing. You can continue this on other court/religion thread.

Faith is using other part of our brain, definitely no critical thinking part.

This post has been edited by lowya: Jun 14 2021, 11:29 PM
brkli
post Jun 14 2021, 11:28 PM

Getting Started
**
Junior Member
298 posts

Joined: Oct 2018
QUOTE(lowya @ Jun 14 2021, 10:13 PM)
"there are no dumb politicians, there are only dumb voters."

is simply a logical cause and effect thinking, majority do no know how to vote is a fact, hence we kept repeating the same political mistake over and over again.

Other than voting, there is no much you can do about it, there is no option 2 to correct the system.
*
which bring us to Confusing Cause and Effect aka Correlation does not imply causation.

example are. majority vote politician A. politician A did dumb things. therefore voter are dumb.

This post has been edited by brkli: Jun 14 2021, 11:38 PM
jojojoget
post Jun 14 2021, 11:28 PM

Getting Started
**
Junior Member
51 posts

Joined: Nov 2020
QUOTE(brkli @ Jun 14 2021, 09:54 PM)
hrm.... how about this??
*
Could be a tu quoque, when politician is criticized they flip the argument and criticize the voter instead. However, there is a cause and effect relationship here, if voters are dumb, then they are liable to elect dumb politicians so not s trong fallacy.
mmusang
post Jun 14 2021, 11:29 PM

Enthusiast
*****
Senior Member
961 posts

Joined: Mar 2006
From: Proud of Kelantan
QUOTE(lowya @ Jun 14 2021, 11:24 PM)
basically the prosecutor (say police) has the evidence (of drug) need to first present the evidence (drug) to prosecute the accused. So the claimer (who said the accused has drug) need to to do proof first. However, it's another topic for the accuse to counter the claim, but we are talking about the person who are liable to first prove it exist is the claimer.

In religion term, the believer must have FIRST present the evidence of god instead of asking nons to do it. AFTER believer proved it, the the nons can argue later otherwise. However if believe can't even prove first, what is there to argue about?

anyway, let's stop it right here, and give other people to chance to ask without derailing. You can continue this on other thread.
*
it is nothing to do with exist or not, it is about who making the claim

exist or not is the content of the claim, and burden of proof is about who making the claim.
SUSlowya
post Jun 14 2021, 11:39 PM

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

Joined: Mar 2009

QUOTE(brkli @ Jun 14 2021, 11:28 PM)
which bring us to Confusing Cause and Effect aka Correlation does not imply causation.

example are. majority do no know how to vote, majority vote a politician A. politician A did dumb things, voter are dumb.
*
politicians do not create voters, but voters elect their politicians. We can be certain on which is cause which is effect in this scenario.

you are right on Correlation does not imply Causation for the given example, however it was used to provoke the norm to blame the cause instead of the effect.

E.g. of Cause is Poor Immune system which has the effect of Sickness's Symptoms, most people don't see it this way, they end up treating the symptoms but continue to live with the cause, a typical way to use non-solutions as solution which leads to chronically unresolved issues.

This post has been edited by lowya: Jun 14 2021, 11:48 PM
SUSlowya
post Jun 14 2021, 11:46 PM

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

Joined: Mar 2009

QUOTE(mmusang @ Jun 14 2021, 11:29 PM)
it is nothing to do with exist or not, it is about who making the claim

exist or not is the content of the claim, and burden of proof is about who making the claim.
*
already mentioned hypothesis do not require evidence, whereas theory required data aka evidence often scientifically.

you can be right hypothetically (from your perspective), but wrong when tested with scientifically data aka evidence.

btw, everyone is absolutely right in their own opinion from their perspective, not going to argue with that.
ken_hidaibuki
post Jun 14 2021, 11:47 PM

Getting Started
**
Junior Member
244 posts

Joined: Jan 2010
Weird. I do study this thought in islamic school. The subject was Mantiq. Very similar to what i studied before
mmusang
post Jun 14 2021, 11:50 PM

Enthusiast
*****
Senior Member
961 posts

Joined: Mar 2006
From: Proud of Kelantan
QUOTE(lowya @ Jun 14 2021, 11:46 PM)
already mentioned hypothesis do not require evidence, whereas theory required data aka evidence often scientifically.

you can be right hypothetically (from your perspective), but wrong when tested with scientifically data aka evidence.

btw, everyone is absolutely right in their own opinion from their perspective, not going to argue with that.
*
we are talking about logical thinking and fallacies here, u are indeed derail too much.
SUSlowya
post Jun 14 2021, 11:54 PM

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

Joined: Mar 2009

QUOTE(mmusang @ Jun 14 2021, 11:50 PM)
we are talking about logical thinking and fallacies here, u are indeed derail too much.
*
exactly on the Burden of Proof, right on the dot of evidence topic.

by mentioning so many example of evidences, you should know i'm talking about the Proof part.

Please don't stir it further unless u have a point to make, else...
SUSlowya
post Jun 14 2021, 11:56 PM

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

Joined: Mar 2009

QUOTE(ken_hidaibuki @ Jun 14 2021, 11:47 PM)
Weird. I do study this thought in islamic school. The subject was Mantiq. Very similar to what i studied before
*
how did it go for you using logic to explain faith or vice versa?
JohnL77
post Jun 14 2021, 11:59 PM

Regular
******
Senior Member
1,241 posts

Joined: Mar 2013



QUOTE(diffyhelman2 @ Jun 14 2021, 09:55 PM)
I think a strawman fallacy occurs when  someone twists our words to use against us, while a red herring is when someone uses an irrelevant point in a debate in order to distract, derail or confuse the topic.

strawman - a false representation of your opponents argument that is easier to attack

red herring - an irrelevant point thrown into the argument

Many arguments contain both strawman and red herring at the same time so thats why we often confuse the two.
*
What is Biden trying to argue here?


ken_hidaibuki
post Jun 15 2021, 12:00 AM

Getting Started
**
Junior Member
244 posts

Joined: Jan 2010
QUOTE(lowya @ Jun 14 2021, 11:56 PM)
how did it go for you using logic to explain faith or vice versa?
*
Apperently not using logic to counter faith. More like tought process. Like i say before more or less the same with what you discuss here.
oe_kintaro
post Jun 15 2021, 12:07 AM

Regular
******
Senior Member
1,615 posts

Joined: Jan 2003
From: Penang


QUOTE(blueq01 @ Jun 14 2021, 05:34 PM)
I don't know this one falls under which psychology term but those with strong ideology just can't assess facts objectively when it comes to race, politics and religion. For example, genuine macai, us/cn licker and religious nut.
*
Low metacognition?
mmusang
post Jun 15 2021, 12:19 AM

Enthusiast
*****
Senior Member
961 posts

Joined: Mar 2006
From: Proud of Kelantan
QUOTE(lowya @ Jun 14 2021, 11:54 PM)
exactly on the Burden of Proof, right on the dot of evidence topic.

by mentioning so many example of evidences, you should know i'm talking about the Proof part.

Please don't stir it further unless u have a point to make, else...
*
I'm not talking about the Proof part,
I'm talking about Burden of Proof logical thinking and fallacies,
people who making claim shall provide proof. as simple as that!

so people who making claim usually avoid responsibilities by:

Denying they need to offer any evidence to support their claim
Pretending they already offered evidence (when they haven’t)
Shifting the burden to someone else by demanding they disprove the claim
Shifting the burden to someone else by demanding they prove the validity of their opposing claim


furthermore, if we are not establishing this, anybody can make any claim just like that, watever it is.

This post has been edited by mmusang: Jun 15 2021, 12:40 AM
brkli
post Jun 15 2021, 12:34 AM

Getting Started
**
Junior Member
298 posts

Joined: Oct 2018
QUOTE(lowya @ Jun 14 2021, 11:39 PM)
politicians do not create voters, but voters elect their politicians. We can be certain on which is cause which is effect in this scenario.

you are right on Correlation does not imply Causation for the given example, however it was used to provoke the norm to blame the cause instead of the effect.

E.g. of Cause is Poor Immune system which has the effect of Sickness's Symptoms, most people don't see it this way, they end up treating the symptoms but continue to live with the cause, a typical way to use non-solutions as solution which leads to chronically unresolved issues.
*
here we have again, the effects is which politician did dumb things/policy. and the cause given is politician is voted in by the voters. but this does not imply the voters are dumb and the cause of dumb policies/things done.

example a mother give birth to a son. the son murder a person. therefore the mother causes the murder to happen?
likeazit
post Jun 15 2021, 01:02 AM

Getting Started
**
Junior Member
96 posts

Joined: Aug 2019
A good video of an interview filled with logical fallacies and how the interviewee go about them patiently.



This post has been edited by likeazit: Jun 15 2021, 01:03 AM
koja6049
post Jun 15 2021, 01:56 AM

Getting Started
**
Junior Member
200 posts

Joined: Feb 2018
QUOTE(brkli @ Jun 15 2021, 12:34 AM)
here we have again, the effects is which politician did dumb things/policy. and the cause given is politician is voted in by the voters. but this does not imply the voters are dumb and the cause of dumb policies/things done.

example a mother give birth to a son. the son murder a person. therefore the mother causes the murder to happen?
*
of course is voters fault. You think voting in an election is masak-masak, no need to evaluate the candidate at all? biggrin.gif

mother is at fault, you think give birth to a son no need to educate and discipline him? hmm.gif

All our societal problems are caused by individualism that doesn't want to take responsibility for the monsters they create smile.gif
SUSlowya
post Jun 15 2021, 08:05 AM

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

Joined: Mar 2009

QUOTE(brkli @ Jun 15 2021, 12:34 AM)
here we have again, the effects is which politician did dumb things/policy. and the cause given is politician is voted in by the voters. but this does not imply the voters are dumb and the cause of dumb policies/things done.

example a mother give birth to a son. the son murder a person. therefore the mother causes the murder to happen?
*
logic aside, you have to learn the intend and the context (which we could go another thread about it but not here please), the intend was as mentioned to shaken the norm (or comfort zone) in order for you to think deeper, but if u take it literally, there is not end to argue, this thread is not intend to argue who is right or wrong, but to teach you to see the fallacy (or flaw) AND THEN avoid engaging it, hence example if u think what i said is not suitable for consumption, you know i gave u a false argument, so u can walk away too.

The best way to handle arguments is not to argue, but to walk away. This thread intend for us to identify an false argument (if u think it's false), NOT TO ENCOURAGE ANYONE TO ARGUE HERE.
SUSlowya
post Jun 15 2021, 08:06 AM

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

Joined: Mar 2009

QUOTE(mmusang @ Jun 15 2021, 12:19 AM)
I'm not talking about the Proof part,
I'm talking about Burden of Proof logical thinking and fallacies,
people who making claim shall provide proof. as simple as that!

so people who making claim usually avoid responsibilities by:

    Denying they need to offer any evidence to support their claim
    Pretending they already offered evidence (when they haven’t)
    Shifting the burden to someone else by demanding they disprove the claim
    Shifting the burden to someone else by demanding they prove the validity of their opposing claim
furthermore, if we are not establishing this, anybody can make any claim just like that, watever it is.
*
and i already agreed on that, not sure what you are still keep going at. Move on to next pls.
SUSlowya
post Jun 15 2021, 08:21 AM

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

Joined: Mar 2009

We don't need another narcissistic hothead here to vent his compulsive behavior like in the (not serious) kopitiam, if i spot another one, you know who you are, i will report and remove.

This is not your usual debate playground, this is for education purpose, for those who appreciate it only.

This post has been edited by lowya: Jun 15 2021, 08:29 AM
Endeavour
post Jun 15 2021, 08:37 AM

Getting Started
**
Junior Member
221 posts

Joined: Apr 2019

Watch any video with Trump in it.. especially the ones when he first started campaigning - chances are there's one or more types of fallacies with the stuff that he says
SUSlowya
post Jun 15 2021, 08:39 AM

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

Joined: Mar 2009

next,

Confusion of Correlation and Causation: Making claims about the cause of something simply because there exist a correlation between two things e.g. high number of Relative Risk Reduction (RRR) vaccine efficacy.

this one is too common, even professionals fell for it.

If you are clear which is correlation and which is cause, only then you can solve the real problem. When you see people use Correlation as Causation, you walk away, don't argue further.
SUSlowya
post Jun 15 2021, 08:41 AM

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

Joined: Mar 2009

QUOTE(Endeavour @ Jun 15 2021, 08:37 AM)
Watch any video with Trump in it.. especially the ones when he first started campaigning - chances are there's one or more types of fallacies with the stuff that he says
*
True, couple with appeal to authority (as a president) it works wonder, but let's not ad hominem him, most politicians fall under same category.

Perhaps one of the best way to use Critical Thinking is for educate voters (with this topic), for them to choose, hopefully, the most probable solution provider aka politician.

Nevertheless, good example u gave.
Starbucki
post Jun 15 2021, 08:47 AM

Ayam betmen
******
Senior Member
1,134 posts

Joined: Apr 2009
How about people who flex at every thread? Is there a name for that?
SUSlowya
post Jun 15 2021, 08:49 AM

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

Joined: Mar 2009

next,

Misunderstanding Statistics Fallacy (sorry no fancy name here): Making strange or erroneous claim about a particular idea by using statistics that have little or no use to the real application.

Classic example is vaccine's Relative Risk Reduction (RRR) versus Absolute Risk Reduction (ARR). ARR also called risk difference (RD), which is better way to compare vaccine efficacy.

However RRR was misused for marketing purpose by bigpharma, even the professionals fell for it, but that is not the main discussion here.

to read a Misunderstanding Statistics Fallacy is not easy but require some preliminary technical understanding. Related: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK63647/

This post has been edited by lowya: Jun 15 2021, 08:54 AM
SUSlowya
post Jun 15 2021, 08:52 AM

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

Joined: Mar 2009

QUOTE(Starbucki @ Jun 15 2021, 08:47 AM)
How about people who flex at every thread? Is there a name for that?
*
you are asking for description (word), we are discussing logical/illogical (statement that back the point someone trying to make).

btw, for the word u looked for, i just used it if u even notice few posts back - "narcissistic hothead"
Starbucki
post Jun 15 2021, 09:12 AM

Ayam betmen
******
Senior Member
1,134 posts

Joined: Apr 2009

Jun 15 2021, 09:19 AM
This post has been deleted by lowya because: i know what u are going at.

oe_kintaro
post Jun 15 2021, 11:02 AM

Regular
******
Senior Member
1,615 posts

Joined: Jan 2003
From: Penang


QUOTE(Endeavour @ Jun 15 2021, 08:37 AM)
Watch any video with Trump in it.. especially the ones when he first started campaigning - chances are there's one or more types of fallacies with the stuff that he says
*
Trump is a textbook narcissist. Narcissists are never wrong in their minds, and warp reality and facts in service of their own needs, i.e., the good things are always their own doing, while the bad things are always someone else's fault: reality is always secondary to the emotional/instinctual impact. Narcissists have an overwhelming need to be at the center of attention. The reason Trump is so effective is because his way of looking at things resonates with a certain percentage of the population with the same psychological traits, hence the fanaticism you see today in the portion of the grassroots who continue to support him. Typically these would be people with low metacognition and other sorts of pathological psychological conditions.

It doesn't matter how many types of fallacies he commits. Basically it is next to impossible to engage a narcissist with just facts and reasoning. If you find yourself in a running flame war with a narcissist, reacting to provocation is usually only adding fuel to fire. Ignoring a narcissist is the best way of depriving him of oxygen because he can't stand not being the center of attention.

This post has been edited by oe_kintaro: Jun 15 2021, 11:03 AM
Fanvil1534
post Jun 15 2021, 01:27 PM

Casual
***
Junior Member
382 posts

Joined: Apr 2018
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.
*
user posted image

user posted image

user posted image

Case in point.
I learned there is no point arguing with someone who has only a sense of duality in any issues, whether you're with us or against us mentality, gives a strawman argument and doesn't give sources of facts to back claims.
SUSlowya
post Jun 15 2021, 03:25 PM

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

Joined: Mar 2009

QUOTE(Fanvil1534 @ Jun 15 2021, 01:27 PM)
Case in point.
I learned there is no point arguing with someone who has only a sense of duality in any issues, whether you're with us or against us mentality, gives a strawman argument and doesn't give sources of facts to back claims.
*
those trooper on payrole are paid to do propaganda, it's no longer their personal view, it's the job to brings the narrative, if the reader has weak mind, without the ability to tell a fallacy from fact, the they will end up singing the same song. Zombies virus are contagious too.
N33d
post Jun 15 2021, 04:39 PM

Enthusiast
*****
Senior Member
855 posts

Joined: May 2007


QUOTE(SleepingDragon @ Jun 14 2021, 08:26 PM)
Survivorship Bias

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Survivorship_bias
Please read the wikipedia for explanation, I provide some examples:

1. I play shares/crypto. Sometimes I win sometimes I lose money. I only tell ppl (or post on lowyat forum) when I make money. Then everyone thinks I make money all the time.

2. I get rejected 9 out of 10 girls I approach. But I approached 100 girls (get rejected 90 times) and still dapat 10 girls so i'm seen in public for some of the 10 girls. My rejections are not shown to the public. So ppl think i'm a playboy PUA expert.

3. Girls think that every guy is a playboy, but they only think about guys in top 10% and they think the rest of the 90% don't exist and therefore doesn't register in their head. So they think every guy (which is the 10%) is a playboy (because the top 10% can dapat multiple girls).
*
survivor bias
in my workplace, last time we were implementing a function that auto capture and submit our internal usage statistic in order to improve our software/app quality where needed
according to the stats, everything seems fine. But we kept getting complaints our stuff crashes here and there

After a while I realized, those critical error and crash didnt even made it to the database, those cases that made it are the one that running fine LOL


SUSlowya
post Jun 17 2021, 09:01 AM

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

Joined: Mar 2009

Another Fallacy for today,

Slippery Slope Argument: arguing that a change in procedure, law or action will create a domino-effect of adverse exaggerated consequences.

Example: If you don't <insert illogical unscientific intend/motive/narratives>, you will kill us (an example of exaggerated consequences or slippery slope).

<insert> was used very profoundly recently, such as "wear mask, get vaccine, stay at home, avoid repurposed drugs, lockdown, stay 1m apart, etc"

Such argument however is very effective when combined with Appeal to Authority to use against weak minds.

This post has been edited by lowya: Jun 17 2021, 09:02 AM
diffyhelman2
post Jun 17 2021, 02:43 PM

Casual
***
Junior Member
476 posts

Joined: Apr 2019
Hi ts i have a new example for you to analyze. What fallacy is this?

QUOTE(etan26 @ Jun 17 2021, 02:40 PM)
"Even with vaccination also dieded." I didn't know with vaccination we could live forever like Shih Huang Ti ..... or we got conned
*
This post has been edited by diffyhelman2: Jun 17 2021, 02:43 PM
SUSlowya
post Jun 17 2021, 05:31 PM

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

Joined: Mar 2009

QUOTE(diffyhelman2 @ Jun 17 2021, 02:43 PM)
Hi ts i have a new example for you to analyze. What fallacy is this?
*
Your bolded part, it was a sarcasm, not an argument.

more examples are welcome, i'm having fun doing this.
diffyhelman2
post Jun 17 2021, 05:48 PM

Casual
***
Junior Member
476 posts

Joined: Apr 2019
QUOTE(lowya @ Jun 17 2021, 05:31 PM)
Your bolded part, it was a sarcasm, not an argument.

more examples are welcome, i'm having fun doing this.
*
I was wondering what the fallacy was when someone infers an extreme and ridiculous conclusion from a given statement.
SUSlowya
post Jun 17 2021, 06:54 PM

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

Joined: Mar 2009

QUOTE(diffyhelman2 @ Jun 17 2021, 05:48 PM)
I was wondering what the fallacy was when someone infers an extreme and ridiculous conclusion from a given statement.
*
depends on context they put it

one way it could be Slippery Slope as just mentioned https://forum.lowyat.net/index.php?showtopi...ost&p=101319048

a lot of fallacies are extreme and ridiculous

This post has been edited by lowya: Jun 17 2021, 06:55 PM
SUSlowya
post Jun 17 2021, 07:00 PM

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

Joined: Mar 2009

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

This post has been edited by lowya: Jun 17 2021, 07:04 PM
SUSlowya
post Jun 18 2021, 01:16 PM

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

Joined: Mar 2009

next up, Appeal to Desperation and Appeal to Ignorance, or let's call it Appeal to Ignorant Desperado if used combined.

QUOTE(judas @ Jun 18 2021, 12:40 PM)
look, big picture.
U know the vaccines aint some silver bullet, u know exactly what i mean there.

But, the thing that killed 80 person a day in our country is due to the cytokine storm, not the bloody virus itself.
At least get some kind of vaccine (doesnt matter whatever brands), in your body, to make sure the body at least recognize the virus,
and then at least you dont get severe cytokine storm/shock when the body suddenly found some unidentified high viral load in the lungs,

So, to me, why do you even compare vaccine efficacy, since the main objective is to prevent death?
therefore the seroconversion is the most important thing, not the efficacy per-se.

just get the damn vaccine, ASAP.
*
QUOTE(DJJD @ Jun 18 2021, 12:59 PM)
Appeal to desperation fallacy

Bahrain took sinopharm and at same per capita as Malaysia they are having 195 dead
*
Appeal to Desperation and Appeal to Ignorance argument has been used for almost everything imaginable since 2019, including social distancing, mask (then double mask), disinfecting, stay at home, endless lockdown, etc. in the similar context especially situation when it lack of information but solution is desperately needed.
9m2w
post Jun 18 2021, 01:28 PM

Victoria Concordia Crescit
*****
Junior Member
903 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
SUSlowya
post Jun 27 2021, 10:54 AM

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

Joined: Mar 2009

QUOTE(lowya @ Jun 27 2021, 08:01 AM)
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.
*
the main problem lies in the inability to clearly define 'god' universally as compared to astronomy (when we discuss how amazing the planetary is), because everyone's spiritual understanding is unique to their own.

How could you discuss something that is interpreted differently by everyone?

But if you look at the planets, astronomers can measure the size, detect the color and shape etc, which everyone can understand on the same page.

Such argument "If there's no God, how come <fill in the blank>." not only irrelevant comparison but meaningless to engage.

Michio Kaku, whom i have a lot of respect for, explained this before.

This post has been edited by lowya: Jun 27 2021, 11:12 AM
Ruris
post Jun 27 2021, 11:47 AM

New Member
*
Junior Member
47 posts

Joined: Oct 2020


Hmm, here's a pattern based filter which I apply. If a typical unker from k write a typical low quality post, about how the universe came to be. Sure go ahead and write it off, it's probably a troll post.

But if you did some reading, you will find out that there's a following that the universe is a simulation, based on.... Wait for it, a filter called Fermi paradox and also some probable quantum science. In fact there's a good amount of similarity between god/simulation created universe.

Now I want to posit that the statement above are unlikely to proven wrong or right in this generation. But subject like that is not a fallacy by itself.

Also, people do throng to religion due to the narrative and meaning it provides. Things can have empirical evidence but at the same time you can't prove the supernatural stuff. Again, no fallacy here.

Judgment based on corporate, working, live experience, that's what makes a quality post/writing and an engaging discussion. Going all out to rip apart someone statement does not.

Someone just quoted an authoritative figure of science... Is that a sin or what?

Just kidding.




SUSlowya
post Jun 27 2021, 12:10 PM

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

Joined: Mar 2009

QUOTE(Ruris @ Jun 27 2021, 11:47 AM)
Hmm, here's a pattern based filter which I apply. If a typical unker from k write a typical low quality post, about how the universe came to be. Sure go ahead and write it off, it's probably a troll post.

But if you did some reading, you will find out that there's a following that the universe is a simulation, based on.... Wait for it, a filter called Fermi paradox and also some probable quantum science. In fact there's a good amount of similarity between god/simulation created universe.

Now I want to posit that the statement above are unlikely to proven wrong or right in this generation. But subject like that is not a fallacy by itself.

Also, people do throng to religion due to the narrative and meaning it provides. Things can have empirical evidence but at the same time you can't prove the supernatural stuff. Again, no fallacy here.

Judgment based on corporate, working, live experience, that's what makes a quality post/writing and an engaging discussion. Going all out to rip apart someone statement does not.

Someone just quoted an authoritative figure of science... Is that a sin or what?

Just kidding.
*
if u read from the beginning you will understand that, again i need to repeat it here that there is 2 layers of onion: one is the Argument Methodology, and the second layer is Fact Finding.

In this thread we are peeling the first one on How Do You Argue Your Points; NOT peeling the second onion layer of Whether Your Argued Fact is True of False.

We are critically investigating into HOW you think (logical or not), not WHAT you think. Do you read me?

if how you think is illogical, it doesn't matter further what you says is "right/wrong". So filter what other says is logical or not first before you jump into arguing, if not logical avoid arguing for nothing.

This post has been edited by lowya: Jun 27 2021, 12:15 PM
Accord2018
post Jun 27 2021, 01:36 PM

Enthusiast
*****
Junior Member
792 posts

Joined: Aug 2015

Jun 27 2021, 10:57 PM
This post has been deleted by lowya because: you are banned.

jojojoget
post Jun 27 2021, 02:25 PM

Getting Started
**
Junior Member
51 posts

Joined: Nov 2020
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.
*
In a way it's a false analogy, the universe and a sock are not alike and cannot be compared in such a way.
diffyhelman2
post Jun 27 2021, 02:29 PM

Casual
***
Junior Member
476 posts

Joined: Apr 2019
QUOTE(jojojoget @ Jun 27 2021, 02:25 PM)
In a way it's a false analogy, the universe and a sock are not alike and cannot be compared in such a way.
*
Yes, that’s one of the arguments put forth against those who believe in the watchmakers analogy.

» Click to show Spoiler - click again to hide... «

SUSlowya
post Jun 27 2021, 04:15 PM

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

Joined: Mar 2009

QUOTE(Accord2018 @ Jun 27 2021, 01:36 PM)
anything can be fabricated. Even evidence in the court may be fabricated. You are not even involved in the process of obtaining the data. If the chain of evidence is broken, then whole things are not reliable, just like TOE based on circumstantial evidence only. You just merely honestly believe the data provided by certain parties. God/religions are based on belief. Belief does not require evidence ya. As long as you cannot prove the belief is wrong, they can continue to believe it. Just like if Bijan believes that he will be acquitted in the SRC case, can you say that he is wrong?
*
true.

again, We are critically investigating into HOW you think (logical or not) here, not WHAT you think.

(how many times i need to say this?)
prophetjul
post Jun 27 2021, 05:50 PM

Look at all my stars!!
*******
Senior Member
9,590 posts

Joined: Oct 2010
“Repeat a lie often enough and it becomes the truth”
Accord2018
post Jun 27 2021, 06:14 PM

Enthusiast
*****
Junior Member
792 posts

Joined: Aug 2015

Jun 27 2021, 06:29 PM
This post has been deleted by lowya because: you'll never get it, pls play at the kopitiam, not here.

Accord2018
post Jun 27 2021, 08:10 PM

Enthusiast
*****
Junior Member
792 posts

Joined: Aug 2015

Jun 27 2021, 10:06 PM
This post has been deleted by lowya because: don't spam anymore.

SUSlowya
post Aug 2 2021, 11:32 AM

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

Joined: Mar 2009

QUOTE(xtylish @ Aug 2 2021, 10:58 AM)
my mum believed so. she said if she not vaccinated, byebye already
*
survival bias with slippery slope.

This post has been edited by lowya: Aug 2 2021, 11:33 AM
Spitzer
post Aug 2 2021, 11:42 AM

Casual
***
Junior Member
306 posts

Joined: Jul 2005
From: K.Hills




QUOTE(Ruris @ Jun 14 2021, 07:45 PM)
Very fast tips /filter to see if the person replying to you is a troll/psycho.
You describe a situation in very precise manner.

The opposing person reply with "so, you're saying" or straight away use an analogy despite having no reason to do so as you're not describing quantum mechanics.
*
I would like to think that, but it’s been proven time and time again it’s usually just because they lack the intelligence to comprehend it.

As much as i love a troll, unfortunately ours here are very basic and uninteresting.
jojojoget
post Aug 12 2021, 06:15 PM

Getting Started
**
Junior Member
51 posts

Joined: Nov 2020
user posted image
Is this really begging the question aka circular reasoning? It just seems like the premise is unsubstantiated and it might be missing a link

SUSlowya
post Aug 12 2021, 06:21 PM

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

Joined: Mar 2009

QUOTE(jojojoget @ Aug 12 2021, 06:15 PM)
user posted image
Is this really begging the question aka circular reasoning? It just seems like the premise is unsubstantiated and it might be missing a link
*
Oh i almost forgot abt this thread tongue.gif

Begging the questions refers to question with built-in assumed facts to bulldoze the narratives.

whereas,

Circular reasoning is using X to prove Y, then Y to prove X. Similar to correlation is not causation.

p/s: how did u manage to get this thread going?
jojojoget
post Aug 12 2021, 09:08 PM

Getting Started
**
Junior Member
51 posts

Joined: Nov 2020
QUOTE(lowya @ Aug 12 2021, 06:21 PM)
Oh i almost forgot abt this thread  tongue.gif

Begging the questions refers to question with built-in assumed facts to bulldoze the narratives.

whereas,

Circular reasoning is using X to prove Y, then Y to prove X. Similar to correlation is not causation.

p/s: how did u manage to get this thread going?
*
so what do you think about the example?
SUSlowya
post Aug 13 2021, 08:45 AM

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

Joined: Mar 2009

QUOTE(jojojoget @ Aug 12 2021, 09:08 PM)
so what do you think about the example?
*
the example is correct, it's how the arguement is carried out we look at, we do not look at opinions, because it could be easily twisted supposed if u murder a murderer example.

This post has been edited by lowya: Aug 13 2021, 08:47 AM
jojojoget
post Aug 13 2021, 01:33 PM

Getting Started
**
Junior Member
51 posts

Joined: Nov 2020
QUOTE(lowya @ Aug 13 2021, 08:45 AM)
the example is correct, it's how the arguement is carried out we look at, we do not look at opinions, because it could be easily twisted supposed if u murder a murderer example.
*
I disagree with the first part and agree with the second. Let me abstract the argument to make it more clear, substituting the content words we get the following:
A is always B.
Therefore, C is B.

This is definitely not circular reasoning as I mentioned. However is it really begging the question? It seems to be missing a link from C to A which would make this a valid deduction. Although it could be that the assumption as you mentioned in your definition of begging the question is that abortion is murder. Is this analysis correct?

The logical form of begging the question is as follows:

Claim X assumes X is true.

Therefore, claim X is true.

Example: The reason everyone wants the new "Slap Me Silly Elmo" doll is because this is the hottest toy of the season!

The example would be better if it said "Abortion is murder because you are murdering a person".

This post has been edited by jojojoget: Aug 13 2021, 01:41 PM
SUSlowya
post Aug 13 2021, 01:42 PM

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

Joined: Mar 2009

QUOTE(jojojoget @ Aug 13 2021, 01:33 PM)
I disagree with the first part and agree with the second. Let me abstract the argument to make it more clear, substituting the content words we get the following:
A is always B.
Therefore, C is B.

This is definitely not circular reasoning as I mentioned. However is it really begging the question? It seems to be missing a link from C to A which would make this a valid deduction. Although it could be that the assumption as you mentioned in your definition of begging the question is that abortion is murder. Is this analysis correct?
*
the link is both murder and abortion are IMPLIED action of LIVES ENDING.
SUSlowya
post Aug 13 2021, 05:03 PM

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

Joined: Mar 2009

QUOTE([email protected] @ Aug 13 2021, 05:01 PM)
Without him, the figure could be 100k. talk is cheap!
*
now THAT is "begging the question" with builtin ASSumption.
jojojoget
post Aug 13 2021, 05:18 PM

Getting Started
**
Junior Member
51 posts

Joined: Nov 2020
QUOTE(lowya @ Aug 13 2021, 05:03 PM)
now THAT is "begging the question" with builtin ASSumption.
*
Hmmm I still don't get this example though. The person is making a claim that if the DG wasn't there the cases would be higher. You can ask for justification of this claim but it isn't begging the question. It would be begging the question if he said "The DG is great because he's doing a good job". Am I just confused?
SUSlowya
post Aug 13 2021, 05:26 PM

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

Joined: Mar 2009

QUOTE(jojojoget @ Aug 13 2021, 05:18 PM)
Hmmm I still don't get this example though. The person is making a claim that if the DG wasn't there the cases would be higher. You can ask for justification of this claim but it isn't begging the question. It would be begging the question if he said "The DG is great because he's doing a good job". Am I just confused?
*
there is a beginning self provided assumption (fake cause) in the statement itself to justify the following claim (effect).

on second look, it seems to be Slippery Slope.

 

Change to:
| Lo-Fi Version
0.0430sec    0.32    5 queries    GZIP Disabled
Time is now: 26th September 2021 - 12:34 PM