Want to get notified of all questions as they are asked? Update your mail preferences and turn on "Instant Notification."
Part one is about how science works even when the public thinks it doesn't. Part two will certainly ruffle some feathers by offering a reason- and science-based perspective on issues where political correctness has gone awry. Part three provides some data-driven advice for your health and well-being. Part four looks at human behavior and how we can better navigate our social worlds. In part five we put on our skeptical goggles and critically examine a few commonly-held beliefs. In the final section, we look at a few ways how we all can make the world a better place.
* This is for the author's bookstore only. Applies to autographed hardcover, audiobook, and ebook.
|
The OP made me chuckle, heh. I imagine (and I believe you're imagining) something like this: Dominic: "Just because X happened, doesn't mean Y is true." Antonio: "Yeah, I don't think we can trust the words of a guy with a one-inch pole." This style of response, while somewhat amusing, is fallacious (usually just ad hominem (abusive)). There's no specific name for when the part of the person being attacked is seen or unseen (logically, insulting someone by weight, or manhood size, are the same thing). Another could be: Violet: "I wish people would realise A and B are not mutually exclusive." Kathryn: "You're saying that because you can't get laid." This sounds more like ad hominem (circumstantial), but it's fallacious for similar reasons. |
answered on Friday, Nov 26, 2021 09:38:30 AM by TrappedPrior (RotE) | |
TrappedPrior (RotE) Suggested These Categories |
|
Comments |
|
|