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.
|
Not much to add as this was covered well. Just one other suggested ‘fallacy spotted’:
This is a general form of abusive analogy. It is most often used in an ad hominem attack on a specific person, but here it is being used as a general setup with the specific targets to be identified later. It is also an example of Godwin’s Law. 😃 |
|||
answered on Wednesday, Mar 31, 2021 11:09:49 AM by Jordan Pine | ||||
Jordan Pine Suggested These Categories |
||||
Comments |
||||
|
|
We're knee-deep - screw that, hip-deep - in fallacious reasoning here.
And this is about the only non-fallacious thing we see - a mere opinion. I'd say it's unfounded, but, as it is, there is no argument here (note the lack of a signpost - e.g. 'therefore', 'thus', 'because', 'consequently' etc).
The author is trying to make a comparison between the demonisation of Jewish people in 1930s Germany, and assessments of the attitudes of white people in American society today, with regards to racial issues. These are not equivalent; Jews were subject to waves of punishing black propaganda intended to scapegoat them for Germany's internal crises, for which they were entirely blameless; thus, the entire project was predicated on a lie. Whether one agrees with Black Lives Matter or not, it is blatant that asking white Americans to take racism more seriously is not 'demonisation' anywhere on the level of that of the Jews in the 1930s, if it can be considered 'demonisation' at all. This is a weak analogy. The author also makes a strawman argument by implying that successful whites are called 'members of the white supremacy'; the real claim is that U.S. society was white supremacist and racial minorities are still feeling the effects of that.
This is irrelevant. People become "person of the year" for being influential the entire year round. We can call this a non sequitur as it gives weak/no support to the underlying argument. Not to mention the fact that Biden and Harris have nothing in common with Hitler.
We could argue cherry picking as the author appears to have ignored this fact. What a garbage OP;ED. I feel sorry for OP for having to read that crap. |
answered on Tuesday, Mar 30, 2021 09:31:31 PM by TrappedPrior (RotE) | |
TrappedPrior (RotE) Suggested These Categories |
|
Comments |
|
|