Too many fallacies are used in arguments on yahoo! answers. Go to this website to learn what different fallacies are: http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/
2006-06-20 08:06:51 · 7 answers · asked by Tessie 3 in Arts & Humanities ➔ Philosophy
I guess I'm not suggesting that logic will work with people when they're being irrational, but if people would start out my using rational arguments, and not personally attacking people, then people may learn something new, or see another point of view without getting pissed
2006-06-20 08:33:47 · update #1
Even more unfortunate than the fact that so many people on Yahoo Anwers! use logical fallacies regularly in their arguments is the fact that so many other users don't know how to recognize them. We should all have to pass a quiz before we can join to demonstrate that we can recognize a straw man fallacy, a slippery slope fallacy, an ad hominem attack, and an ad populum fallacy before we're allowed to post a single response or question!
You have given me a great idea, however. I think I'll start identifying logical fallacies in questioners' arguments from now on. It will save me a lot of time and might even convince others to do the same.
2006-06-20 08:23:12 · answer #1 · answered by magistra_linguae 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Sneaking through a fallacy is an important tool in arguing! Changing the subject, directly attacking the reliability of the arguer with baseless allegations, attacking the validity of their point by pointing out their lack of skill with grammar and spelling, and Straw Man principles are also valuable tools. The question becomes what you define as better. Do you mean arguing to win, or arguing to prove a point? There's been debate about that for centuries.
2006-06-20 08:41:54 · answer #2 · answered by Beardog 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It's not really about knowing all the rhetorical styles, and how to analyze propaganda, and all of that. I learned that in school many years ago. It's about keeping your cool when someone is being such an irrational [expletive deleted] that even explaining to them the fallacies of their -- whatever it is they do instead of thinking -- is clearly not worth the effort. Like that girl with purple hair on the bus this morning . . . even after the driver told her to quiet down, she continued to make an [expletive deleted] of herself. Then she started throwing personal insults at me because I had dared to ask her to cool it. When she got off the bus, she pounded on my window from the outside.
After she got off the bus, the two guys she had been talking to started talking about her, and how she used to be so hot, but now she's ruined herself with alcohol and drugs. But then THEY continued to talk trash enough that the driver told them "no profanity on the bus," and one guy said, "Did I use profanity?" I said, "Yes, you did, but it's become so common you probably didn't even notice." He was using the "f-ing" word just as if it was a regular adjective. A very, very common adjective.
What good would logic and rhetoric have been this morning?
2006-06-20 08:18:18 · answer #3 · answered by auntb93again 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It appears that there are positions in which the argument will be solely subjective, such as "I am a beautiful person." Neither inductive nor deductive reasoning can varify this position. This is when we have to just take someone's word for it, especially if we are never going to meet this person. So, there is no need to argue, "Just believe that you are beautiful, and remain that way."
2006-06-20 08:32:45 · answer #4 · answered by JazzyJB 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Maybe now I can win against my husband! Yeah!
2006-06-20 08:10:01 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I would, if it would help me win arguments.
2006-06-20 08:10:50 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
NO-I'm already the best there is
2006-06-20 08:10:49 · answer #7 · answered by ? 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋