When is it logical and illogical to claim the following
Historical archive only. New interaction is disabled.
Original Question
If someone argues a subject and uses the argument that "that's because of genetic input from their ancestors" when is it logical and when is it fallacious. Not really concerned with logical form as much as logically sound.
Can we really argue anything other than predisposition to something as opposed to genetic certainty?
Btw, the obvious of course is physical traits , race, eye color etc. I mean something that might not be so self evident. Ty
P.s. Bo doesn't know Diddly. Lol lets see if Bo remembers that one too.....
Can we really argue anything other than predisposition to something as opposed to genetic certainty?
Btw, the obvious of course is physical traits , race, eye color etc. I mean something that might not be so self evident. Ty
P.s. Bo doesn't know Diddly. Lol lets see if Bo remembers that one too.....
Answers
1This is more of a case of not understanding genetics than an error with reasoning. Genetics contribute to physical, biological, and psychological traits—in very few cases do they actually determine these (as implied by the causal language "that's because..."). Even height is only about 90% heritable. The other 10% is not due to genetics, but environmental factors such as diet. The best way to respond to someone claiming "that's because of genetic input from their ancestors" in reference to a psychological/behavioral trait, is a little education on heritability, specifically how it is only a contributor and not a determinant.
Master Logical Fallacies Online
Take the Virversity course and sharpen your reasoning skills with structured lessons.
View Online Course