Want to get notified of all questions as they are asked? Update your mail preferences and turn on "Instant Notification."
Many of our ideas about the world are based more on feelings than facts, sensibilities than science, and rage than reality. We gravitate toward ideas that make us feel comfortable in areas such as religion, politics, philosophy, social justice, love and sex, humanity, and morality. We avoid ideas that make us feel uncomfortable. This avoidance is a largely unconscious process that affects our judgment and gets in the way of our ability to reach rational and reasonable conclusions. By understanding how our mind works in this area, we can start embracing uncomfortable ideas and be better informed, be more understanding of others, and make better decisions in all areas of life.
* This is for the author's bookstore only. Applies to autographed hardcover, audiobook, and ebook.
|
I'd say this is a version of the galileo fallacy - in that one, "Everyone thought Galileo was wrong too, but he turned out to be right" is used as justification for believing someone spouting any old nonsense. The rebuttal to this is that while there may be a few examples of things which seemed ludicrous turning out to be true, the vast majority of ludicrous seeming things were not true. |
answered on Saturday, Sep 05, 2020 04:33:55 PM by Jim Cliff | |
Jim Cliff Suggested These Categories |
|
Comments |
|
|
|
The two statements are merely opinions, while the third "supportive" statement might be merely an analogy, and only weak and just contentious. At a minimum, the proponent needs to clarify the validity of the analogy. If the only basis for supporting A is that the two (A and X) were similarly initially refuted, it is an example of non sequitur and argument from ignorance |
answered on Tuesday, Sep 08, 2020 07:56:59 AM by DrBill | |
DrBill Suggested These Categories |
|
Comments |
|
|