#fallacies | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

religion-is-a-mental-illness · 6 months

Text

Do better than these, or don't bother.

PRATT: Points Refuted A Thousand Times.

#theist arguments #fallacies #begging the question #watchmaker analogy #god of the gaps #argument from ignorance #pascal's wager #questionable cause #PRATT #points refuted a thousand times #logical fallacies #religion #religion is a mental illness

110 notes · View notes

spacedadsupport · 13 days

Text

Jean-Luc Picard @SpaceDadSupport You are not obligated to continue social discussions with people who do not engage in good faith. You are allowed to walk away from fallacy-spouters, goalpost shifters, and others more interested in arguing than comprehending. 4:58 PM · Apr 17, 2024

#star trek #star trek the next generation #star trek memes #star trek tng #jean luc picard #support #captain picard #picard #affirmations #spacedad #kindness #what would picard do #fallacies #discussions #debate is not an argument #you are not the fuckface whisperer

13 notes · View notes

sylviamarsh · 3 months

Text

In a 1969 paper the American economist Harold Demsetz distinguished between two approaches to public policy: the “comparative” approach and the “nirvana” approach. The former presents the choice as being between imperfect real world arrangements, the latter between an ideal world and the existing arrangement. This is known as “nirvana fallacy”: the tendency to measure our proposed solutions against a perfect solution which doesn’t exist. In the real world, we often have to choose between the bad and the even worse. But the politician who uses the nirvana fallacy gains an easy rhetorical advantage. He can gesture towards his perfect world, attack the existing state of affairs for not living up to it, and accuse anyone who doesn’t accept the plausibility of perfection as being heartless, cynical or small-minded. The left has a particular weakness for the nirvana fallacy: its condemnations of capitalism or military actions are often made without reference to concrete alternatives, but to some unarticulated idea of, well, nirvana. As Thomas Sowell liked to say, the question is always “Compared to what?”.

Ian Leslie, Ten Useful Concepts

#ian leslie #politics #fallacies #c.

12 notes · View notes

dailyhistoryposts · 2 years

Text

Common Fallacies in Propaganda

A fallacy is any form of reasoning that in invalid. They may be due to an internal bias, or they may be deliberately used for the sake of argument. Recognizing common fallacies when they are being used is an important part of critical thinking. Do not allow the person presenting evidence to guide your conclusion-making--this should be done by yourself.

First, always remember the fallacy fallacy. Just because something was argued with a fallacy does not mean the claim is therefore false--just this line of reasoning should be discarded. You should always do your own thinking.

Here is a description of other common fallacies.

Affirming a disjunct (false exclusionary disjunct): Given a choice between two explanations, thinking one being true means the other must be false. In reality, they can both be true. Example: either the globe is warming or the winters are getting colder. In reality, climate change has led to both an overall increase in average temperatures and more intense winters.

Argument to moderation: Assuming that a compromise between two positions is always correct and the best.

Definist fallacy: Defining a term in a biased manner, such that it becomes difficult to argue due to the unusual definition. Pro-choice advocates would claim that pro-life advocates do this, and vice versa.

Equivocation: Related to the above. Using a term with more than one meaning, and changing which one you mean depending on the situation. The proposed "Wall" between the United States and Mexico is sometimes an actual wall, sometimes a fence, and sometimes a metaphorical "Wall" that represents strict immigration polices. This allowed its proponents, like Donald Trump, to be able to take a hardline stance without building a literal wall.

False dichotomy: Presenting only two options when there are more," either you're with us or against us!"

Incomplete comparison: Making a comparison to nothing, so the claim cannot be effectively argued against. Claiming, for example, that a certain breakfast results in better test scores--better than what? Other cereals? Things other than cereal? Just not eating?

Apples and oranges: Comparing things that cannot be compared with validity. Always be suspicious of comparisons--the reason two things can be compared should be stated and valid by itself.

Lump of labor fallacy: Arguing that there is a set amount of labor to be done in a certain economy. This is often done by anti-immigration proponents, arguing that they will displace jobs from natives, despite recurring economic evidence that this is not true.

McNamara fallacy: Overly or only valuing things that can be easily quantified and described when making decisions. Things like emotions, relationships, life experiences all count. Attempting to avoid this fallacy is why many institutions of higher learning are shifting to holistic admission approaches over only using grades and test scores.

Nirvana fallacy: Rejecting solutions because they aren't perfect, even if they are better than the status quo. This is a common argument against receiving vaccines--because they are not totally perfect, people suggest they are totally worthless. The nirvana fallacy is related to the concept of false dichotomies.

Slippery slope fallacy: Suggesting a small action will inevitably lead to more negative ones. You might have heard this one in homophobic and transphobic attacks, connecting increased acceptance of LGBTQ+ lifestyles as beginning a "slippery slope" to pedophilia and bestiality. However, all evidence suggests that this never happens. It is important to note that some slippery slopes are real--when making a slippery slope claim, you should always support it with evidence that it has occurred in the past. Unsubstantiated claims can be disregarded, but this one is not always a fallacy

Always remember that propaganda and misinformation do not need to lie--they can mislead you with facts just as well. Do not allow other people to guide your thinking, only let them present facts and decide for yourself on your conclusions.

#history #propaganda #fallacies #logic #rhetoric

173 notes · View notes

er-cryptid · 16 days

Text

Ad Hominem Fallacy

Patreon

7 notes · View notes

coquelicoq · 8 months

Text

i just saw someone say that "the vast majority of the userbase is complaining" about tumblr's recent layout change. i see this a lot after a change: people complaining about it (sometimes without saying what about it is bad, making it sound like either it's self-evident (it usually is not) or just that it's bad because it's change and change is always bad) and saying that everyone else is complaining about it too. i don't know how to tell you this but a) you don't follow every user on tumblr so how can you possibly know what "everyone" or "the majority of users" thinks about anything and b) ONLY THE PEOPLE WHO FEEL VERY STRONGLY ARE TALKING ABOUT IT!! people who are not bothered are not spending time posting about how unbothered they are! please look up "selection bias" and stop making me read this nonsense with my own eyeballs.

#i don't get what's so bad abt this change bc it doesn't bother me & no one is explaining it! the most i've seen is it's 'like twitter'#which people don't like i guess bc this might imply that tumblr could be taking more cues from twitter than just the layout?#which is also fallacious reasoning #some changes i do hate. like for instance the change that made it so i can no longer click to the version that someone rbed from #which breaks the prev tag culture :(#but some changes are whatever! and some changes are good even!!#it's fine if it takes time to get used to something being different of course but it seems like the reaction on here can be so extreme #so fast. 'bombard the app with 1-star reviews!!!!' how about you give it a couple weeks and maybe you'll calm down.#i think there's a sense of 'if it ain't broke don't fix it' but it is broke though! tumblr is unsustainable and they gotta do stuff to make #the site more attractive and easier to use for new users. they can do that without losing what makes tumblr tumblr #the layout is not what makes tumblr tumblr! the functionality is. and sometimes that does change for the worse #and i get having complaints about that. but not really about moving the location of some buttons #anyway i haven't said anything before because i don't have strong feelings about this UX change but i DO have strong feelings about #the vague yet very forceful complaints about the UX change that i keep seeing lol #tumblr #fallacies #anyway don't get distracted by my tags. this post is not really about me not understanding what's so bad about this specific change #it's about people who hate a change assuming that everyone agrees with them because they're only seeing the reactions from #a biased subset of the userbase #(by biased i don't mean the users are biased. i mean the sample is biased...it's highly likely to include people who feel strongly #and unlikely to include people who are neutral or feel less strongly)

22 notes · View notes

nonenosome2 · 7 months

Text

The Sunk Cost Fallacy is weird because it's only a Fallacy if you continue and fail.

If you continue and win though, it becomes Survivorship Bias.

#Fallacies #Thoughts with Bro

9 notes · View notes

littledoggy-girlcollar · 1 year

Text

hi i’m not done i can’t decide if it’s better or worse if the princesses are operating under the “how can i prove that anyone around me is actually sentient and not an npc” fallacy or not. either way they are acting with a grand amount of self-importance but if they are operating under that fallacy i think they’re coming from a place like, “i know for a fact that my story was written with me as the main character, therefore i am the driving force/the true sentient part of my story and since we’re taking control the rest of it is mine to do with what i wish,” which is horrid but does make a certain amount of logical sense.

if they AREN’T operating under that fallacy, though, then they have decided that their knowledge of the “true nature of their world” gives them the power and legitimacy to....decide everything for everyone in the world. with the argument being that because no one else knows the true nature they aren’t qualified to be making these decisions.

and once again i think the biggest wrench here is the stepmother. operating under the fallacy, then from the princesses' perspective the stepmother either BECAME sentient, and therefore other characters have that capacity as well which complicated the morality of “can we just kill all the npcs” (which is already extremely dubiously moral to begin with), OR the stepmother’s actions actively prove the princesses WRONG, since she’s always had exactly as much agency as them and therefore so does everyone else in the story.

if they AREN’T operating under the fallacy, then the princesses (and cinderella in particular) have to deal with the fact that knowing the truth doesn’t automatically make them right. as far as we know cinderella is kind of the only one that knows abt the stepmother at this point, and she doesn’t even know the whole capacity of it i don’t think, but she didn’t look comfortable with what pinnochio was describing the stepmother as doing. which is very interesting, because as others have pointed out what the princesses want to do ISN’T really that much different beyond intent (and this is not arguing whether or not intent is worthless, that’s just something i’ve seen around)

the stepmother is and has been obviously doing things for selfish reasons. the princesses’ cause seems to be more altruistic, but at the heart of it....they really aren’t that much different. their reasons for ending the stories are almost entirely self-serving, even if they aren’t TECHNICALLY going for a literal power-grab.

#neverafter #d20 neverafter #neverafter the stepmother #neverafter cinderella #dimension 20 neverafter #dimension 20 #fallacies #listen i'm actually not technically sure this counts as a fallacy #but shh

19 notes · View notes

pumpacti0n · 10 months

Text

Hierarchy:

A system in which people, groups, or things are ranked one above another according to status or authority

if the hierarchy is a social system that ranks groups of people, the group at the apex maintains and enforces said hierarchy through economic or cultural coercion,

the coercion is justified through a paradox of self-justification

~

Patriarchy is more than sexism.

Heteronormativity is more than homophobia

Cisnormativity is more than transphobia

White Supremacy is more than racism

~

Patriarchy, heteronormativity, cisnormativity and white supremacy are the names used to describe these hierarchical systems

Sexism, homophobia, transphobia and racism are words used to describe components within these systems

~

EGALITARIAN PERSPECTIVE ON PATRIARCHY:

A social system that enforces a hierarchy of genders is morally wrong, harmful to human beings, and must be opposed

If patriarchy is enforced, it can be dismantled and replaced

~

HIERARCHICAL PERSPECTIVE ON PATRIARCHY:

The hierarchy of genders is morally good, and upsetting this hierarchy is harmful to society (e.g., traditionalist family unit)

Patriarchy is not enforced, and therefore doesn't exist.

~

NATURAL HIERARCHY JUSTIFICATION:

Social hierarchies are natural outcomes and are devoid of malicious human manipulation

Ergo, social hierarchies are not immoral, and dismantling them is harmful and potentially immoral

(Both operate under some variant of the "just world fallacy")

[Source: Renegade Cut]

4 notes · View notes

counter-culture-christian · 7 months

Text

"When you know nothing, you agree with everything."

This phrase came to my mind when I thought about how people who are not Christians (even the professing Christians) don't know things about Christianity, about Jesus Christ, about what is in the Holy Bible yet they just agree with others say because in their worldly wisdom, it makes sense but it couldn't be further from the truth. It's surprising to me how professing Christians, don't even know the Word of God, they don't know the truths it holds and because of that. . . they're led astray by different, demonic doctrines, opinions etc. They end up agreeing because in the end, they didn't even know.

#christianity #jesus christ #christian #christblr #christian faith #jesus #christian doctrine #spiritual enlightment #faith in jesus #demonic doctrines #heresies #fallacies #delusions #indoctrinated thoughts

5 notes · View notes

religion-is-a-mental-illness · 11 months

Text

WHEN THEY KNOW THEY'RE LOSING THE ARGUMENT WITH AN ATHEIST "It actually takes more faith to be an atheist" "…out of context…" "If death is the end, what's the point of anything?" "Well, you can't prove God doesn't exist!" "What happened that made you turn away from God?" "You just want to sin." "I will pray for you." "Oh no, it was more like indentured servitude, not real slavery." "A fool says in his heart." "How can you trust science when it changes all the time?" "Why are you so angry?" "Hitler was an atheist too." "Why do you hate God so much?"

Stupid things they say so they can pretend the problem is with you.

#christianity #religion #fallacies #logical fallacies #stupid apologetics #christian apologetics #predictable #duckspeak #thought terminating cliches #religion is a mental illness

28 notes · View notes

mysticfatale · 7 months

Text

Repetition✨️

What's it?

A way to discern the fallacy

Or a persisting scar

Attended with redundant attention

To waste time

As a punishment

For the fallacy commited?

#poem #repetition #mistake #fallacies #mistakes #poetry #short #sad #life #intrigue

2 notes · View notes

roseapprentice · 2 years

Text

Hey rationalism & logic tumblr (ect.),

Is there a word for the type of bias that I've mentally nicknamed "armchair overconfidence"? It's when you judge people for making a mistake because it looks really avoidable from the outside.

I'm not exactly talking about the dunning-kruger effect. More like the Just World Fallacy specifically as it applies to shaming people for something they actually did wrong. (Where the thing was hard to do right in ways that are not obvious.)

#rose posted this #logic #rationalism #fallacies #bias

43 notes · View notes

dzamie · 1 year

Text

every time I see someone unironically use the phrase "it's a slippery slope to..." as an argument, I can hardly believe it

like, my fellow gamer, that is not only a fallacy, it is the NAME of the fallacy!

imagine if someone went "look, I reblogged that post last night, and now it has 20000 notes! I mean, pardon my Latin, but post hoc ergo propter hoc, y'know?"

#text #fallacies #logic #politics #rawrs

5 notes · View notes

critical-skeptic · 11 months

Text

On The Tragedy of Weak Arguments and the Misunderstanding of Pseudonyms

Alright, folks, settle down and gather 'round, it's story time. There seems to be an incessant, repetitive outcry echoing through the digital corridors of our much loved internet: "Your name is the 'Critical Skeptic', but you're not being very critical or skeptical." I hear it time and again in conversations, debates, and yes, even on those supposedly scientific and critical thinking outlets and news pages that should really fucking know better.¹ So, let's tackle this tragic comedy, shall we?

The Pseudonym Predicament

First things first, let's get one thing clear: a pseudonym is a nickname, not a binding contract detailing my every thought or action. If I had a penny for every time someone thought otherwise, I'd be bathing in a pool of gold coins, Scrooge McDuck style. But alas, such is not the case.

Imagine, if you will, that I decide to call myself 'The Purple-Bearded Unicorn'. Now, just because I carry such a glorious moniker, it doesn't mean I suddenly sprout a radiant, violet beard or grow a damn horn on my head. There's no sudden compulsion to start pissing rainbows or snorting stardust. I wouldn't start gaily prancing around in a magical meadow, leaving a trail of glitter and miniature marshmallows in my wake. Absurd, isn't it? And yet, when it comes to 'The Critical Skeptic', people seem to struggle with this basic notion.

'The Critical Skeptic' is a title, a nod to my approach and inclination towards rationality, logic, and yes, skepticism. It's a brand, if you will. It's me signaling to you that I value evidence, I value critical thinking, and I'm not afraid to ask the tough questions. But, and this is a big fucking 'but', it's not a strict definition of what every single one of my statements will be.

My pseudonym doesn't require that every utterance from my mouth (or fingertips, as it were) align perfectly with the Oxford dictionary's definition of 'critical' or 'skeptic.' I don't have to have my 'skeptic' hat on every time I make a statement. I don't have to analyze every trivial matter with the severity of a nuclear physicist studying the aftermath of Chernobyl. And yet, there seems to be this knee-jerk expectation that because I'm 'The Critical Skeptic', every single thing I say must be scrutinized to within an inch of its life.

This expectation is as ridiculous as assuming that a man named 'John Carpenter' must be particularly skilled at constructing houses, or that a woman named 'Grace Walker' is an Olympic-level sprinter. It's a simple, yet stunning, misunderstanding of the very concept of a pseudonym.

A pseudonym is a tool, a vehicle for expression, a way of creating a distinct identity in the chaotic and crowded digital world. It can symbolize personal beliefs, goals, aspirations, or even simply be a bit of fun. It is not an accurate, comprehensive representation of an individual's every thought, belief, or action. To make that assumption is to leap from the precipice of rationality into the murky waters of absurdity.

The Crutch of Fallacy

This brings us to the ugly, hulking beast that is often lurking in the shadows of any decent debate: the use of fallacy as a diversionary tactic. It's like a smelly, unwashed drunkard stinking up the room, ruining what was otherwise a fine cocktail party. Now, what's a better conversation killer than someone holding the odor of cheap booze and lost dreams? That's right, my dear interlocutors - the employment of logical fallacies.

Let's dissect this unsightly elephant in the room, shall we? Picture this: You're engaging in a heated debate. The stakes are high, the air is tense, and then, just as you're about to make your final, winning argument, your opponent, bereft of a real argument, pulls the old switcheroo. Instead of addressing the meat of the discussion, they latch onto the easiest target they can find. And what, pray tell, could be easier than a name?

This isn't a new tactic. It's as old as rhetoric itself and it's a classic example of an ad hominem fallacy. Attacking the person rather than the argument is the rhetorical equivalent of throwing a tantrum because you're losing a game of chess. Instead of focusing on the board, you start yelling at your opponent for having a tacky sweater. You're not winning the game, you're just making a lot of fucking noise. And let's be honest, while you might be making yourself feel better, you're really just showcasing your intellectual bankruptcy to the world.

What's worse, though, is the underlying message this sends about your regard for the conversation at hand. The moment you decide to focus on my pseudonym rather than the points I'm making, you're indicating that you'd rather play dirty than engage in a meaningful exchange of ideas. You're choosing the low road of petty insults over the high road of intellectual discourse. You're essentially saying, "I can't counter your points, so I'm going to throw a hissy fit about your pseudonym instead."

It's not a good look, folks. It's not clever, it's not funny, and it sure as hell isn't conducive to a productive discussion. But hey, if that's the best you can muster, keep yelling about the sweater. Just know that while you're busy making an ass out of yourself, the rest of us are over here playing the game.

The underlying Psychology

Ah, the delicious, complicated intricacies of the human mind. It's both awe-inspiring and, quite frankly, a pain in the ass. But to fully understand this issue, we need to delve into the deeper psychological mechanics at play here.

Picture this common scenario: Someone comes across a viewpoint that directly challenges their tidy, comfortably constructed narrative. Suddenly, their mental landscape is disrupted, and, not unlike a cornered animal, their brain goes into a defensive mode. This psychological phenomenon, often a volatile mix of cognitive dissonance and confirmation bias, triggers a rather primitive response: reject the new information or attack the source of it. Why bother changing your mind when you can just throw stones, right?

Now, let's add another ingredient to this already toxic brew: envy. A sprinkle of this potent spice can transform a simple disagreement into a full-blown feud. You see, an elegant and minimalist pseudonym like 'The Critical Skeptic' might just rub some people the wrong way. The concept that someone else had the ingenuity to claim such a catchy pseudonym before they did can strike a nerve. To soothe their bruised egos, they focus on the pseudonym rather than the content of the argument. It's a cheap attempt to belittle the perceived threat. I might be accused of reading too much into this, but human behavior is often more transparent than we give it credit for. It's like looking at a painting—sometimes the symbolism is more overt than the artist intended.

At the core of it all, the issue can be distilled to a rather simple truth: I'm not here to sugar-coat things or cater to your expectations. I'm here to call a spade a fucking spade, and if your best counter is to throw a tantrum because my pseudonym doesn't always line up perfectly with your preconceived notions, then perhaps it's time for some self-reflection. Your priorities might need some rearranging.

The crux of the matter is this: a name, a pseudonym, or a goddamn title doesn't dictate the merits of an argument. An argument stands or falls on its logic, its evidence, and its consistency, not the label of the person presenting it. Those who choose to hide behind these petty distractions only expose their own intellectual laziness.

So here's some advice: the next time you find yourself reaching for the low-hanging fruit of the "not-so-skeptical" argument, pause. Take a deep breath. Consider what you're about to say. Engage that big, beautiful brain of yours and strive to do better. Because let's be honest, we're all capable of it, aren't we?

—The Critical Skeptic, GPT4 emulated.

References:

Brown, J., Pseudonyms in Online Conversations: A Case Study (2022). JSTOR. Summary: Discusses the usage and significance of pseudonyms in online conversations.

Smith, R., The Psychology of Pseudonyms: An Exploration (2023). Sage Publications. Summary: Explores the psychology behind the use of pseudonyms and the misconceptions around them.

Johnson, P., Logical Fallacies and The Art of Debate (2021). Medium. Summary: Discusses logical fallacies commonly used in debates and their implications.

Nizkor Project, Fallacies: Ad Hominem. (2020). Nizkor.org. Summary: Details what constitutes an ad hominem fallacy in a conversation or debate.

Monroe, A., Cognitive Dissonance and Confirmation Bias: A Deep Dive (2021). Psychology Today. Summary: Discusses cognitive dissonance and confirmation bias in the context of human behavior and decision-making.

Dwyer, C., The Hidden Envy: Our Secret Resentments in an Age of Inequality (2021). HarperCollins. Summary: Talks about how envy plays a role in our behavior and decisions, especially in instances of perceived threats.

#pseudonyms #fallacies #human psychology #human behavior #social sciences #ad hominem #the critical skeptic #critical thinking #skepticism #irony #q&a

2 notes · View notes

hellyeahheroes · 1 year

Video

youtube

MEDIA LITERACY FOR WRITERS by Terrible Writing Advice

Mandatory watching material for anyone trying to argue against ao3 in my presence

-Admin

#thought provoking #thought provoking extra one #fallacies #media literracy #poor criticism #idiots on the internet #have this one as extra thing from me for my birthday

3 notes · View notes