Question

...
87blue

What fallacy is this?

In response to me saying:

Gametes cannot be used to create a sex binary in humans, because no gametes can be present along with ambiguous or mixed gonadal tissue. When this happens, other sex markers have to be considered, none of which are binary.

He responded:


You think these cases debunk sex binary? Lol. More people are born without limbs yet we still say humans have 2 arms, 5 fingers, and are bipedal. Deformities don’t define normativity

What fallacy is this?

 
asked on Thursday, Jun 15, 2023 06:51:51 PM by 87blue

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."

Like the Site? You'll Love the Book!

This book is a crash course, meant to catapult you into a world where you start to see things how they really are, not how you think they are.  The focus of this book is on logical fallacies, which loosely defined, are simply errors in reasoning.  With the reading of each page, you can make significant improvements in the way you reason and make decisions.

Get 20% off this book and all Bo's books*. Use the promotion code: websiteusers

* This is for the author's bookstore only. Applies to autographed hardcover, audiobook, and ebook.

Get the Book

Answers

...
FormerRedditor
0

I would call this poor communication rather than committing a specific fallacy. You both seem to agree on the fact of the matter, that some humans don't have the typical biological markers of a binary male or female. But your initial sentence, that a sex binary cannot be created, leaves some room for interpretation.

What it seems to me that you're trying to communicate is that there are some people who don't fall clearly into the male/female sex classifications as we understand them, so it ceases to be a true, ironclad binary. How I think this other person interpreted that, though, was as you saying that the binary sex classification system we use is completely unworkable, despite the fact that it works for the vast majority of people, and is attempting to refute that point.

answered on Thursday, Jun 15, 2023 10:58:15 PM by FormerRedditor

FormerRedditor Suggested These Categories

Comments
...
0
87blue writes:

The problem is that he has an essentialist view of sex using gametes as a standard, but the fact is that gametes need to be produced, so the organs that produce it should be the standard by his logic. 

posted on Friday, Jun 16, 2023 12:42:23 AM
...
0
Dr. Richard writes:
[To 87blue]

Perhaps this is the Fallacy of the Stolen Concept.  A concept is “stolen” when one asserts a concept while denying or ignoring its epistemological or genetic roots. Can one posit a concept while denying the concept’s prior roots? Logically, of course, one cannot do this. For example, one cannot discuss the concept of an orphan while denying the concept of parents.

But I'm not clear as to the premises you use. Perhaps a simple XX and XY comparison is more simple.

 

 

[ login to reply ] posted on Friday, Jun 16, 2023 12:01:16 PM
...
0
FormerRedditor writes:

[To Dr. Richard]

As I'd read this:

P1: The binary created from sex chromosomes relies on humans having either XX or XY chromosomes.

P2:  Some humans have been observed to have other combinations of sex chromosomes. (Side note: From what I'm finding, there are 6 other known combinations which combined, compose about 0.1-0.2% of people)

C:  Sex chromosome cannot be used to create a sex binary.

That said, this doesn't appear to be a perfect analog to the OP's argument, since they further elaborate that gametes/sex cells are created by gonads/genitalia, which also have examples of nonbinary features. I'd view this as a reinforcement of P2 rather than a separate premise.

[ login to reply ] posted on Saturday, Jun 17, 2023 11:19:46 AM