Sociopath Community

I hate the fallacies

used to like them, until i thought about it

Good said: 

I hate the fallacies

used to like them, until i thought about it

Lol explain

Scarlett:

Ambiguity

Groupthink

The Halo Effect

The Sunk Cost Fallacy 

Tu Quoque

Xadem:

Confirmation Bias

Just World Hypothesis 

Reactance

The Spotlight Effect

Me:

Burden of Proof

Appeal to Nature

In Group Bias

Blanc said: 

Good said: 

I hate the fallacies

used to like them, until i thought about it

 

Lol explain

They are often used as a buzz word or in a dishonest way. You could say they are a fallacy themselves. And I can take issue with them, esp the 'true Scotsman' one, that one makes no sense, to begin with, and it's not even a fallacy. In different context there most definitely are true Scotsman and false ones. People can easily misuse this fallacy and instead of using it when it really is appropriate, you should just debate without even using these buzz words, this is true for all fallacies.

do me aub

Good said: 

Blanc said: 

Good said: 

I hate the fallacies

used to like them, until i thought about it

 

Lol explain

They are often used as a buzz word or in a dishonest way. You could say they are a fallacy themselves. And I can take issue with them, esp the 'true Scotsman' one, that one makes no sense, to begin with, and it's not even a fallacy. In different context there most definitely are true Scotsman and false ones. People can easily misuse this fallacy and instead of using it when it really is appropriate, you should just debate without even using these buzz words, this is true for all fallacies.

 I disagree honestly, maybe there is a fallacy for saying all fallacies are a fallacy ;)

Good said: 

Blanc said: 

Good said: 

I hate the fallacies

used to like them, until i thought about it

Lol explain

They are often used as a buzz word or in a dishonest way. You could say they are a fallacy themselves. And I can take issue with them, esp the 'true Scotsman' one, that one makes no sense, to begin with, and it's not even a fallacy. In different context there most definitely are true Scotsman and false ones. People can easily misuse this fallacy and instead of using it when it really is appropriate, you should just debate without even using these buzz words, this is true for all fallacies.

I'm starting to think you don't get their meanings and/or purpose. I mean especially "No True Scotsman", that one plays completely straight. Your argument here is over exceptions to cases instead of the Fallacies as a whole, but what lacks exceptions, and should people not use fallacies just because some other people might screw it up? 

You're the one who goes on about streamlining, is it really more 'efficient' to describe the entire concept every time it occurs, or to use lingual shorthand? 

Fallacies (barring your cherry picking of exceptions) undermine, slow down, and even mislead debate through heuristics, which is why they even gave names to such easy and otherwise potentially misleading strategies. When you see people utilizing "Appeal to Emotion" in gross ways for instance, why not call them on it, and if you're going to call them on it, doesn't it make sense to have a shorter way of saying it? 

Tbh I think this mostly boils down to you trying to justify not liking them. Debates shouldn't be purely about winning like some kind of Tug of War, they should be about winning correctly to the point of seeming more like Red Rover. 

Right, you're also somewhat alluding to yet another fallacy: 



You however take the above as reason to abolish the entire practice, likely through veiled personal incredulity and/or compositional division.