Logical Fallacies: a Study

[Ariovistus Maximus]

I knew I was just asking for it by writing that essay.

I'll never escape the constant criticism every time I say something wrong!!! AAAAAA!!!

Lol j/k of course, but the thought has crossed my mind.

That's something that may have use in a beginners (non mathematical) logic class. In debates, your reasoning really doesn't matter as much as your assumptions, assertions, conclusions, etc. Statements are the thing that should matter, not the argument itself. At least that's what I think.

Point taken.

The essence of my thoughts there is simply that, although you are correct in saying that logical continuity and validity is not the sum-total of debate, it generally tends toward better debate.

That's aaaalllll I'm saying. Simply pointing out that there is a balance.

You don't have to be a validity-Nazi, but you shouldn't ignore the notion of validity either.

OK? OK.

You will indeed be hard pressed to actually show that fallacious arguments lead to false conclusions more than non fallacious arguments.

Possibly.

However, if you take a gander at the average online debate forum...

By the way, be VERY careful of advocating the elimination of invalid arguments.

Fish.

Oh... right.

At any rate, I'm not saying that they should be eradicated any more than you are saying that they should be the only means of discussion. I'm just suggesting that you might not want to intentionally employ them on a regular basis to make your point.

Logically, you can't disprove a claim that fallacies are essential to starting good arguments by posting an imaginary anecdote where a fallacy leads to a bad argument.

Simply providing a counterexample to demonstrate what I have mentioned above: that balance is important.

[Reenk Roink]

I knew I was just asking for it by writing that essay.

I'll never escape the constant criticism every time I say something wrong!!! AAAAAA!!!

Lol j/k of course, but the thought has crossed my mind.

At any rate, I'm not saying that they should be eradicated any more than you are saying that they should be the only means of discussion. I'm just suggesting that you might not want to intentionally employ them on a regular basis to make your point.

Oh don't get me wrong, your thread is one of the few interesting ones for me (I rarely post or even venture in the Backroom anymore - and when I do I just look for the Tribesman threads for his wit and barbs.

It might be better served at a different audience than the Orgah one though, as here, not many people go "This is my argument and it is completely logical so the conclusion must follow" rather they usually have these background assertions that they hold which are incompatible with some other people and then they .

[Ariovistus Maximus]

It might be better served at a different audience than the Orgah one though, as here, not many people go "This is my argument and it is completely logical so the conclusion must follow" rather they usually have these background assertions that they hold which are incompatible with some other people and then they .

Definitely.

The .Org has an atmosphere more of discussion than formal debate, so this is not as relevant.

Interesting they take on different forms like that.

[Azathoth]

http://www.fallacyfiles.org/ is a great site.

[Ariovistus Maximus]

Also try www.nizkor.org

I was directed there from the TWC. Excellent resource. Covers everything I did and more, not to mention it is of course of higher quality.