|
|
Post by xxxxxxxxx on Jan 5, 2021 2:24:55 GMT
For example:
The fallacy of circularity is a fallacie because it is a fallacy.
The fallacy of authority is an authoritative statement.
The fallacy of slipper slope is defined as one definition resulting into another, one limit into another, one boundary into another, etc.
Dually one fallacy negates another:
The fallacy of circularity is an authoritative statement.
The fallacy of authority is a fallacy because authoritative statements are fallacies.
The fallacy of circularity results in authority which results in further fallacies thus is slippery slope.
|
|
|
|
Post by joustos on Jan 5, 2021 17:33:28 GMT
For example: The fallacy of circularity is a fallacie because it is a fallacy. The fallacy of authority is an authoritative statement.
The fallacy of slipper slope is defined as one definition resulting into another, one limit into another, one boundary into another, etc. Dually one fallacy negates another: The fallacy of circularity is an authoritative statement. The fallacy of authority is a fallacy because authoritative statements are fallacies. The fallacy of circularity results in authority which results in further fallacies thus is slippery slope. I think you are getting confused more and more by the day.... or at least you are confusing your readers more and more. I bolded one of your statements: You are obviously referring to the "ipse dixit" fallacy; that is, it is wrong to prove a point by appealing to the authority or reputation of a man who made the same point. I concur. And for the same reason I am against the use of precedents in court cases. However, you get lost, you make no sense, when you say that this fallacy is "an authoritative statement". HOW is that ?? It is not a fallacy because Aristotle or some other logician declared it to be so; it is because "he said so" has no probationary value, is not an evidence item that might support an argument. |
|
|
|
Post by xxxxxxxxx on Jan 6, 2021 17:06:45 GMT
For example: The fallacy of circularity is a fallacie because it is a fallacy. The fallacy of authority is an authoritative statement.
The fallacy of slipper slope is defined as one definition resulting into another, one limit into another, one boundary into another, etc. Dually one fallacy negates another: The fallacy of circularity is an authoritative statement. The fallacy of authority is a fallacy because authoritative statements are fallacies. The fallacy of circularity results in authority which results in further fallacies thus is slippery slope. I think you are getting confused more and more by the day.... or at least you are confusing your readers more and more. I bolded one of your statements: You are obviously referring to the "ipse dixit" fallacy; that is, it is wrong to prove a point by appealing to the authority or reputation of a man who made the same point. I concur. And for the same reason I am against the use of precedents in court cases. However, you get lost, you make no sense, when you say that this fallacy is "an authoritative statement". HOW is that ?? It is not a fallacy because Aristotle or some other logician declared it to be so; it is because "he said so" has no probationary value, is not an evidence item that might support an argument. The fallacy of authority is an authoritative statement in the respect it is accepted as a fallacy on behalf of an authority. Those whose developed the fallacies are authorities and these fallacies are accepted on behalf of an authority, be it an individual or a group of people. The fallacy acts as an authoritative stance given its sets a precedent. |
|
|
|
Post by joustos on Jan 6, 2021 17:55:53 GMT
For example: The fallacy of circularity is a fallacie because it is a fallacy. The fallacy of authority is an authoritative statement.
The fallacy of slipper slope is defined as one definition resulting into another, one limit into another, one boundary into another, etc. Dually one fallacy negates another: The fallacy of circularity is an authoritative statement. The fallacy of authority is a fallacy because authoritative statements are fallacies.
The fallacy of circularity results in authority which results in further fallacies thus is slippery slope. Since when is an authoritative statement a fallacy? Your doctor's diagnosis may be wrong, but it is not automatically wrong because it is made by a man who is expert in medical matters. Rather, YOU commit a fallacy if you believe that, because of his expertise, the diagnosis is (or must be) correct -- if you think this way: He said so [ipse dixit]; therefore, it must be so. |
|
|
|
Post by xxxxxxxxx on Jan 7, 2021 3:42:56 GMT
For example: The fallacy of circularity is a fallacie because it is a fallacy. The fallacy of authority is an authoritative statement.
The fallacy of slipper slope is defined as one definition resulting into another, one limit into another, one boundary into another, etc. Dually one fallacy negates another: The fallacy of circularity is an authoritative statement. The fallacy of authority is a fallacy because authoritative statements are fallacies.
The fallacy of circularity results in authority which results in further fallacies thus is slippery slope. Since when is an authoritative statement a fallacy? Your doctor's diagnosis may be wrong, but it is not automatically wrong because it is made by a man who is expert in medical matters. Rather, YOU commit a fallacy if you believe that, because of his expertise, the diagnosis is (or must be) correct -- if you think this way: He said so [ipse dixit]; therefore, it must be so. It is fallacious if accepted because of an authority on behalf of an authority. The fallacy of authority is accepted because of an authority on behalf of an authority. Dually if it just accepted as a fallacy, because it is a fallacy, this is the fallacy of circularity. All authoritative statements are accepted as authoritative because of their source, thus the fallacy of authority falls under this dilemma. The fallacy of authority does not state whether the statement is wrong or not, it states the statement is deficient in reason because an authority figure replaces the logical argument. The statement could be correct and still a fallacy. This is the "fallacy fallacy", if memory serves, which states an assertion could still be correct even if fallacious. |
|
