
Your Logical Fallacy Is - simon_acca
https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/
======
awptimus
I have an acquaintance whose main method of argument is shouting out names of
logical fallacies without pointing out to the person he's arguing with where
and how it applies.

This list is helpful as a guide to spot errors in reasoning. It is not helpful
as a tool to facilitate discussion.

If you use this reference, do us all a favor and discuss how the fallacy
applies in the current discussion, and treat the person with some respect at
least.

~~~
davidivadavid
So he should read the section on the "fallacy fallacy."

------
nicky0
When you have to resort to pointing out the name of your opponent's logical
fallacy, you have already lost the debate.

~~~
NTripleOne
If only more people understood this.

Pointing out a fallacy might as well be a fallacy itself.

~~~
chillwaves
You might enjoy this,

[http://existentialcomics.com/comic/9](http://existentialcomics.com/comic/9)

but more to the point, conversation is more constructive when folks engage in
the practice of principle of charity [1] where you will interpret the other's
argument in the strongest possible light. This helps create more light, less
smoke and avoid the gotcha-ism associated with fallacy fallacy.

[1]
[http://philosophy.lander.edu/oriental/charity.html](http://philosophy.lander.edu/oriental/charity.html)

------
Xoros
I guess they didn't like Schopenhauer's eristic dialectic. "The Art of Being
Right: 38 Ways to Win an Argument"

[https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Art_of_Being_Right](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Art_of_Being_Right)

~~~
dredmorbius
Another underappreciated classic. Thanks for posting.

------
dredmorbius
Various groundings in truth, logic, deduction, inference, scientific method,
and mathematical proof, are useful.

I'd start with the distinction between _didactic_ and _rhetorical_ speech, for
starters, a distinction and conflict which goes back to Plato's contempt for
the Sophists (from whence: sophistry). I had the realisation in the past year
or so that I'm frequently, so to speak, bringing a didactic knife to a
rhetorical gunfight. The two modes mix poorly.

[https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectic](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectic)

There is the distinction between formal logical argument (syllogism), and more
informal argument.

[https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syllogism](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syllogism)

And between _valid_ and _sound_ arguments.

The field of epistemology, and _criteria of truth_ is one that far more people
could use grounding in. _How do you make a determination that something is or
isn 't true?_ Based on incomplete information, partial understanding of that,
and limited time? Turns out there's a study of the problem, within philosophy,
and some useful guidance:

[https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criteria_of_truth](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criteria_of_truth)

Protip: apply _coherence_ , _consistency_ , or _pragmatic_ principles where
possible. Be aware of the others and their weaknesses though.

The best use of logical fallacies I've found is to apply them to my own
thinking, and to be aware of their use as rhetorical ploys by others.

I'd stumbled across a set of frequently used "dirty tricks" some time back,
collected here:

[https://www.reddit.com/r/dredmorbius/comments/2d0r1d/the_rea...](https://www.reddit.com/r/dredmorbius/comments/2d0r1d/the_reactionary_political_debate_playbook_karl/)

~~~
mercer
Is there some newsletter or blog I could follow with more thoughts of yours
like these? I find myself spending more and more time on this topic and a
comment like this is a wonderful jumping-off point for me on my 'down whatever
rabbit-hole' study days :-).

EDIT: just realized we have profile pages and you have links on yours. Silly
me.

~~~
dredmorbius
Principally [https://dredmorbius.reddit.com](https://dredmorbius.reddit.com)

I cooked up a lot of these ideas posting to G+ as well, see especially my
Epistemology collection:

[https://plus.google.com/collection/8lUNg](https://plus.google.com/collection/8lUNg)

My definition of "Tech and Media" is expansive, but there's some coverage
there:

[https://plus.google.com/collection/MVQzY](https://plus.google.com/collection/MVQzY)

~~~
mercer
Cool, thanks. And right in time for my weekend reading adventures too!

