Are there any fallacies in this exchange?
Historical archive only. New interaction is disabled.
Original Question
(This takes place in south Florida where there are a lot of republican cubans and latinos)
Person 1: Socialism is bad because I have talked to latinos who fled from socialist countries and they told me socialism is bad.
Person 2: Yeah but thats just anecdotal evidence.
Person 1: No, its true because the people who actually have experience with socialism will tell you that its bad and that they want no part of it.
Person 2: Yeah but they are republican conservatives and anyone can fall into that ideology and believe that form of rhetoric and misinformation.
Person 1: No its not rhetoric and not misinformation, they know because they came from socialism so thats a fact, socialism is bad and they will tell you that.
Person 2: You have to look at all the data and statistics to get the bigger picture and not just talk to a few people off the street or a few of your friends. You are a republican, so are all your friends so you are just preaching to the choir.
Person 1: Nope, you can believe what you want to believe I will believe what I want to believe.
Person 2: Ugh.... Why don't you care about the facts?
Person 1: Nope, those are your facts and Ive got my facts you'll never convince me that I am wrong they are my beliefs and I have a right to them.
Comments on Question
Answers
1Person 1: Socialism is bad because I have talked to latinos who fled from socialist countries and they told me socialism is bad.
The language here is not precise, so this could get messy. If by "bad" person 1 means "lowers the well-being for the group" then this is anecdotal (some call it a fallacy, I am not so sure it is one). However, if person 1 means "bad for me" then this is perfectly fine.
Person 2: Yeah but thats just anecdotal evidence.
This could be jumping to conclusions or even a strawman fallacy if person 1 was referring to it being bad for them.
Person 1: No, its true because the people who actually have experience with socialism will tell you that its bad and that they want no part of it.
It is more clear now that person 1 meant bad for everyone. This could be amazing familiarity or just hasty generalization . Again, it could be person 1 failing to be precise in their language. Perhaps they just meant a few of their like-minded friends, in which case this is a biased sample fallacy .
Person 1: No its not rhetoric and not misinformation, they know because they came from socialism so thats a fact, socialism is bad and they will tell you that.
Same fallacies... taking a small, biased, sample and extracting to the population.
Person 2: Ugh.... Why don't you care about the facts?
Given the conversation so far, this is a reasonable question. However, technically begging the question . I suspect that person 1 thinks the facts on their side.
Person 1: Nope, those are your facts and Ive got my facts you'll never convince me that I am wrong they are my beliefs and I have a right to them.
Ahhh. The "alternative facts," defense. Of course, facts are independent of belief. In fairness, this might just be sloppy language. Steelmanning this argument, Person 1 likely means person 2 is wrong about what they are considering facts, but they lack the language and background in argumentation to articulate this.
Master Logical Fallacies Online
Take the Virversity course and sharpen your reasoning skills with structured lessons.
View Online Course
How does one's bad experience in one system of governance become misinformation after they are assumed to have changed political affiliations?