|
|
You have rights - as long as you don't use them.Imagine a political activist (Mr. X) who calls a politician (Mr. Z) a traitor. Furious, the government passes a law making it illegal to call public officials traitors.
Instead of getting angry at the government, the public turns on Mr. X: "If you had just kept your mouth shut, we'd still have that right!" What they're effectively saying is we have certain rights in theory, which is really cool - just as long as we don't actually use those rights. Does the public's argument constitute a fallacy? If so, what kind? |
| asked on Thursday, May 24, 2018 03:57:50 PM by David Blomstrom | |
Top Categories Suggested by Community |
|
Comments |
|
|
| |
Want to get notified of all questions as they are asked? Update your mail preferences and turn on "Instant Notification."
Claims are constantly being made, many of which are confusing, ambiguous, too general to be of value, exaggerated, unfalsifiable, and suggest a dichotomy when no such dichotomy exists. Good critical thinking requires a thorough understanding of the claim before attempting to determine its veracity. Good communication requires the ability to make clear, precise, explicit claims, or “strong” claims. The rules of reason in this book provide the framework for obtaining this understanding and ability.
This book / online course is about the the eleven rules of reason for making and evaluating claims. Each covered in detail in the book.
|
|
That is funny! It sound like an Inconsistency |
| answered on Thursday, May 24, 2018 04:00:51 PM by Bo Bennett, PhD | |
Bo Bennett, PhD Suggested These Categories |
|
Comments |
|
|
| |
|
|
Wouldn't this be a false cause? He's done nothing wrong, and at worst is a catalyst.
|
| answered on Thursday, May 24, 2018 05:39:30 PM by Bryan |
Comments |
|
| |