
The Old Taxonomy of the Logical Fallacies - onuralp
http://www.fallacyfiles.org/taxonomy.html
======
YeGoblynQueenne
To be honest, although this is a good resource, if I see another comment on
the internet using the phrase "that's a fallacy" or "your argument is false"
and other pseudo-logical phrases like that, I'm going to... to... drink some
water to calm down.

It's just so annoying in the middle of a conversation people suddendly
switching to an analysis of the _structure_ of the debate, especially since
nine times out of ten they have no idea what they're talking about and just
use "fallacy" and "argument" as stop-words (words to end debate).

~~~
maxxxxx
Sometimes I get an intense desire to punch someone in the face who says
proudly "this is the xxx fallacy". Sometimes it's actually really insightful
but most of the time they have no clue.

~~~
torgoguys
Correctly identifying fallacies is a useful skill. Doing it incorrectly and
thinking you are correct is a detriment to yourself and conversation. (Kinda
like how certain people say "fake news" to refer to things they don't agree
with, even if it is factual).

------
infinity0
Looks like both the old and the new omit the "fallacy fallacy" which is to
assume someone's conclusion is false, simply because their argument on why
it's true was fallacious.

~~~
eivarv
How does one formulate what constitutes a correct response to discovering a
fallacy in an argument?

I know the conclusion isn't necessarily false, but I also have no reason for
assuming it to be true - since there is no good argument to support it.

~~~
hydrox24
You continue holding the same position, having not been convinced to change
it.

Though I think it is even better to weigh how much of the argument rests on
the fallacious premise (or step) and then evaluate the argument sans fallacy.

------
ndr
For a ctrl-f friendlier version:
[http://www.fallacyfiles.org/taxonnew.htm](http://www.fallacyfiles.org/taxonnew.htm)

I'm not sure whether the old vs new is about presentation or actual content.

~~~
YeGoblynQueenne
The entry for the conjunction fallacy mentions Trump and Pence, so it must be
new:

[http://www.fallacyfiles.org/conjunct.html](http://www.fallacyfiles.org/conjunct.html)

