If you know enough fallacy types you can basically regress any argument to a set of fallacies. Good job you now have the super power to suggest anything said by anyone is a fallacy. Go and use your powers for being extremely annoying and super counter productive.
That's where the fallacy fallacy comes into play. It's the ultimate trap card for those obsessed with pointing out fallacies.
The uno reverse?
That's because arguments and debates are not the same thing. Fallacies apply to legitimate debate. They do not apply to arguments.
I'm going to disagree with this.
Fallacies are logical flaws, they exist regardless.
Being trained in epistemology to identify my own faulty thinking is one of the best things I've ever done.
Not for arguing or debating, but for communicating, and expressing myself sincerely.
This right here. Some motherfuckers here really going around pretending that precise language is bad because logic is unemotional? Not sure when emotional language ever helped bringing our fellings across to the another person. Quite ironic.
Of coure just blurting out "**** fallacy" to anyone in a conversqtion is fruitless.
Ah yes, the fruit fallacy. Just because someone walks around pretending to be a fallacy genius does not mean they aren't a giant pussy too scared to open themselves up, and reveal their seed of truth.
I would say the opposite, it makes more sense to me to apply fallacies to arguments where as to apply it to a debate you probably have to isolate its main arguments and then apply it to those arguments individually
Furthermore, debates are not governed by logic. A debate in of itself is a fallacy, in the sense that it is merely a popularity contest.
If you can bullshit hard enough, or make the crowd laugh at your jokes about the person you're debating, you've won.
If you know enough fallacy types you can basically regress any argument to a set of fallacies. Good job you now have the super power to suggest anything said by anyone is a fallacy. Go and use your powers for being extremely annoying and super counter productive.
That's where the fallacy fallacy comes into play. It's the ultimate trap card for those obsessed with pointing out fallacies.
The uno reverse?
That's because arguments and debates are not the same thing. Fallacies apply to legitimate debate. They do not apply to arguments.
I'm going to disagree with this.
Fallacies are logical flaws, they exist regardless.
Being trained in epistemology to identify my own faulty thinking is one of the best things I've ever done.
Not for arguing or debating, but for communicating, and expressing myself sincerely.
This right here. Some motherfuckers here really going around pretending that precise language is bad because logic is unemotional? Not sure when emotional language ever helped bringing our fellings across to the another person. Quite ironic.
Of coure just blurting out "**** fallacy" to anyone in a conversqtion is fruitless.
Ah yes, the fruit fallacy. Just because someone walks around pretending to be a fallacy genius does not mean they aren't a giant pussy too scared to open themselves up, and reveal their seed of truth.
I would say the opposite, it makes more sense to me to apply fallacies to arguments where as to apply it to a debate you probably have to isolate its main arguments and then apply it to those arguments individually
Furthermore, debates are not governed by logic. A debate in of itself is a fallacy, in the sense that it is merely a popularity contest.
If you can bullshit hard enough, or make the crowd laugh at your jokes about the person you're debating, you've won.