Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Rhetological Fallacies

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Rhetological Fallacies

    Could be a useful tool for all WAB debaters:

    Rhetological Fallacies

    Last edited by bigross86; 03 Apr 12,, 12:12.
    Meddle not in the affairs of dragons, for you are crunchy and taste good with ketchup.

    Abusing Yellow is meant to be a labor of love, not something you sell to the highest bidder.

  • #2
    The most senior Catholic bishop here in the UK recently outlined his argument against same-sex marriage. Here’s our rhetological matrix applied to his speech.

    Meddle not in the affairs of dragons, for you are crunchy and taste good with ketchup.

    Abusing Yellow is meant to be a labor of love, not something you sell to the highest bidder.

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by bigross86 View Post
      The most senior Catholic bishop here in the UK recently outlined his argument against same-sex marriage.
      You are checking if we pay attention, or you just copy/pasted?
      No such thing as a good tax - Churchill

      To make mistakes is human. To blame someone else for your mistake, is strategic.

      Comment


      • #4
        Copy paste. The website is from the UK, apparently...
        Meddle not in the affairs of dragons, for you are crunchy and taste good with ketchup.

        Abusing Yellow is meant to be a labor of love, not something you sell to the highest bidder.

        Comment


        • #5
          logical falacies - gotta love em - what would politics be without them - I suggest it would be called statemanship and crime (by far the domient variant).
          sigpic"If your plan is for one year, plant rice. If your plan is for ten years, plant trees.
          If your plan is for one hundred years, educate children."

          Comment


          • #6
            It's kind of meaningless because there is virtually no argument that doesn't apply one of those fallacies. I could apply all of them the the AGW crowd but AGW is accepted doctrine.
            In the realm of spirit, seek clarity; in the material world, seek utility.

            Leibniz

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by bigross86 View Post
              Could be a useful tool for all WAB debaters
              Definitely and very well explained.

              Comment


              • #8
                I still remember (and own) the philosophy text we used in my intro course - Irving M Copi - Introduction to Logic. The chapters on the logical falacies were amoung my favorite parts - I recall one pre-law student in my class being very enthusiastic about using them in his professional career.

                They are indeed a part of most arguments - since convinving people of your point is often an emotianal endeavor - rather than a truely logical one.
                Last edited by USSWisconsin; 04 Apr 12,, 01:50.
                sigpic"If your plan is for one year, plant rice. If your plan is for ten years, plant trees.
                If your plan is for one hundred years, educate children."

                Comment


                • #9
                  Ironic, after reading all of those, I have seen each and every one of them used here. I can even apply members names to some of those....but I won't.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by USSWisconsin View Post
                    They are indeed a part of most arguments - since convinving people of your point is often an emotianal endeavor - rather than a truely logical one.
                    That's down to the audience. Some will respond, nay, most will respond to appeals to emotion. Three ways to get conned, get you angry, scare you or get somebody sexually attractive to do the talking.

                    But take a court room, with the presence of an opposing lawyer the tendency for appeals to emotion is a great deal less. Unless the arguments are made in a logical fashion the chance of a winning or losing a case are equal. Emotions still play a role but a very subtle one.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Double Edge View Post
                      That's down to the audience. Some will respond, nay, most will respond to appeals to emotion. Three ways to get conned, get you angry, scare you or get somebody sexually attractive to do the talking.
                      Is this a conclusion from some research? What happened with someone being polite towards you?

                      But take a court room, with the presence of an opposing lawyer the tendency for appeals to emotion is a great deal less. Unless the arguments are made in a logical fashion the chance of a winning or losing a case are equal. Emotions still play a role but a very subtle one.
                      If the case is not a slamdunk for one of the sides, both will try to play on the emotional card. Or I am wrong?
                      No such thing as a good tax - Churchill

                      To make mistakes is human. To blame someone else for your mistake, is strategic.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Julie View Post
                        Ironic, after reading all of those, I have seen each and every one of them used here. I can even apply members names to some of those....but I won't.
                        Personally I'm a big fan of the sweeping generalisation:)
                        In the realm of spirit, seek clarity; in the material world, seek utility.

                        Leibniz

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Ladies and gents,don't be shy.Anyone can receive a good pill of criticism.Self criticism is even better,particularly if you're into Marxism :)
                          Those who know don't speak
                          He said to them, "But now if you have a purse, take it, and also a bag; and if you don't have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one. Luke 22:36

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Karl Marx. If there's one person I'd bring back to life, it would be Karl Marx, if only so I could kill the sonuvabitch again
                            Meddle not in the affairs of dragons, for you are crunchy and taste good with ketchup.

                            Abusing Yellow is meant to be a labor of love, not something you sell to the highest bidder.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Doktor View Post
                              Is this a conclusion from some research? What happened with someone being polite towards you?
                              Am referring to media reports.

                              And its IME, anecdotal if you like.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X