Want to get notified of all questions as they are asked? Update your mail preferences and turn on "Instant Notification."
This book is a crash course, meant to catapult you into a world where you start to see things how they really are, not how you think they are. The focus of this book is on logical fallacies, which loosely defined, are simply errors in reasoning. With the reading of each page, you can make significant improvements in the way you reason and make decisions.
* This is for the author's bookstore only. Applies to autographed hardcover, audiobook, and ebook.
|
|
Looks like the person is trying to draw an analogy between human life and animal life. Since it is considered wrong to draw a distinction between different types of human (people from different countries, for instance), the inference is that it is also wrong to draw a distinction between humans and animals. You can argue this is problematic. The comparison is not like-for-like - when drawing distinctions between different types of humans, you're still ultimately dealing with one species - humans! So they'd still fit into one category with most characteristics in common, it'd just be a case of them belonging to different geographical regions. When drawing distinctions between animals and humans, however, you're dealing with different species, as there are many different kinds of animal. In other words, they'd fit into multiple categories depending on their characteristics. Thus, you're more likely to get significant differences. Therefore, treating people who differentiate between animals and humans to those who differentiate between humans from other countries fails to take this into account. The analogy can be considered weak. Also, if someone keeps bringing up irrelevant points to change the topic, this is known as a red herring. |
| answered on Sunday, May 01, 2022 05:41:27 AM by TrappedPrior (RotE) | |
TrappedPrior (RotE) Suggested These Categories |
|
Comments |
|
|
| |