Did I classify the fallacy correctly?
Historical archive only. New interaction is disabled.
Original Question
Answers
2First, I would characterize this fallacy as follows:
" If propositions
x and y cannot both be true, then x and y MUST each be false. "
Two possible contingencies exist (will use examples to illustrate each).
1. X = All dogs are reptiles
Y= All dogs are insects
Propositions X and Y cannot both be true, and each proposition separately is false.
(If this were the only possibility, no fallacy would exist.)
2. X= All dogs are mammals
Y= All dogs are reptiles
Again, Propositions X &Y cannot both be true, however, Propositions X IS true, while Y is not.
Thus, this contingency illustrates the fallacy of the original statement.
In the real-world example cited by the OP, there are of course numerous religions, however,
this principle remains intact, and the atheist s proposition is fallacious.
The format for that fallacy is "Since event Y followed event X, event Y must have been caused by event X." In this case, we aren't really talking about causes and events; we are talking about drawing an unsubstantiated conclusion from a premise. I would say that this is more of a Non Sequitur or even simply an unsubstantiated claim if we don't accept that the CIA has ties with Amazon.
Logical Form:
Claim A is made (''CIA has ties with Amazon")
Evidence is presented for claim A (none is here, but if we can assume we agree that the CIA has ties with Amazon...)
Therefore, claim C is true ("Amazon Echo is spying on people'') -> Say what? We took a huge leap that would require many supporting facts. We simply skipped those steps.
Master Logical Fallacies Online
Take the Virversity course and sharpen your reasoning skills with structured lessons.
View Online Course