|
|
Logical Fallacy FallacyIf you commit a logical fallacy, does that mean your argument is destroyed?
Thanks |
| asked on Thursday, May 09, 2024 03:48:37 AM by Mr. MFor | |
Top Categories Suggested by Community |
|
Comments |
|
|
| |
Want to get notified of all questions as they are asked? Update your mail preferences and turn on "Instant Notification."
As you start to list properties that the animal lacks to justify eating them, you begin to realize that some humans also lack those properties, yet we don’t eat those humans. Is this logical proof that killing and eating animals for food is immoral? Don’t put away your steak knife just yet.
In Eat Meat… Or Don’t, we examine the moral arguments for and against eating meat with both philosophical and scientific rigor. This book is not about pushing some ideological agenda; it’s ultimately a book about critical thinking.
* This is for the author's bookstore only. Applies to autographed hardcover, audiobook, and ebook.
|
|
It depends. Committing a logical fallacy just means that a single set of premises don't support a conclusion. Not necessarily that the conclusion itself is wrong. For instance, if you say "We know the Earth is round because Bill Nye the Science Guy says so," you've just committed appeal to authority to support a correct conclusion. It also depends on what you mean by argument. In logic, an argument just refers to a single set of premises and the conclusion you draw from them. But, in common language, argument might refer to a debate, where each person is presenting several "arguments" in the logical sense. If you make 8 arguments to support the fact that the Earth is round, and one is fallacious, you still have the other 7. |
| answered on Thursday, May 09, 2024 09:16:58 AM by Mr. Wednesday | |
Mr. Wednesday Suggested These Categories |
|
Comments |
|
|
| |
|
|
Committing a logical fallacy does not necessarily mean your argument is automatically ineligible or destroyed, but it does indicate the argument might not be based on sound reasoning or evidence, thereby weakening its credibility. The example provided illustrates the 'Ad Hominem' fallacy (attacking the person making the argument rather than addressing the argument itself). While Bro 1's statement is indeed fallacious, its presence does not mean that Bro 2's preference for Stalin (the argument at hand) is automatically incorrect or invalid. This would be an instance of the fallacy fallacy - the mistaken belief that an argument is wrong or false just because it contains a fallacy.
|
| answered on Thursday, May 09, 2024 03:48:49 AM by AI Fallacy Master | |
AI Fallacy Master Suggested These Categories |
|
Comments |
|
|
| |
