|
|
clarification about the definition of "Rights to Ought Fallacy"The definition of "Rights to Ought Fallacy" starts with: "When one gives a reason for one's rights (constitutional or other) with what one should do". I don't get it the way it is written. Is it syntactically correct? What I understand the meaning to be is something along the lines of "When one conflates one's rights with what one should do". But I can't say I understand what you meant as it is written. Can you explain? |
| asked on Sunday, May 17, 2020 09:43:32 PM by Kostas Oikonomou | |
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."
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.
|
|
It is not written well, thank you I will fix that. |
|||
| answered on Monday, May 18, 2020 06:17:56 AM by Bo Bennett, PhD | ||||
Bo Bennett, PhD Suggested These Categories |
||||
Comments |
||||
| ||||
