|
Suspected logical fallacies in debate: "Hard Facts, Raw Video and Statistics", "Appeal to motive", "Appeal to authority" and so much moreI was debating a self described American neo conservative/libertarian with a few other people (or what he called it a neolibertarian, from what I found online, neolibertarianism is a combo of libertarian ideology with neo conservative elements) with America over the issue of political opinions of American universities, specifically the question on whether conservative students were being pushed out of colleges and universities, sometimes by force. I encourage everyone to just take a few minutes and watch this video. It's excellent. I responded by saying it sounded like the video was conspiracy flinging. He replied with this: Not conspiracy flinging in the slightest, its all based on hard facts and data. I know its unnerving but its really the state of things in the states. Also not sure what "conspiracy" this would be pushing anyways. I replied with what I saw, which was the implication that the boogeyman left is taking over universities for anti conservative agenda. To which he said in a long winded mini essay: It is clear you either did not fully watch, or simply did not understand the video. That's not what its claiming at all. Nowhere does it claim that a "conspiracy" is underway... I said it was literal garbage, to paraphrase because I used terms, and got this as a reply: It is documented. Literally documented. As Corr can attest, the Evergreen State College is a perfect example. The Multiple Riots at Berkely preventing Conservatives and even Libertarians from speaking. Extensive property damage. Demands from black students at American University for a "Black only" section of campus. By this point, it was clear he had an agenda on about what he calls "radical leftism", and I called him out on the incrediuity of what he is proposing. I suspected he was trying to lure me in by using the sources of his statistics he was claiming to say that it was not a fallacy, and I have a hard time believing that myself. I have a good supercut source.
Watch at least some of the videos. Survey was conducted among nationwide college professors, who self reported their political persuasion and affiliation. Doesn't get more simple than that. If you choose to disbelieve, that's your fault not the facts'. To say that they don't would be asinine, especially when they are instructing their students on how to think critically, or in the case of marxists, to think without question. The Primary School level is different. But in College, professors often impart personal beliefs onto their students. That much is obvious. Do you honestly not believe that a Professor who is a devoted Marxist is going to impart a marxist ideological view on his students? A 4-year education in social justice almost inevitably leads to leftism in those impressionable students being taught said garbage.
Common sense is a pretty good source.
2008 America is not 2016 America for one. |
asked on Monday, Dec 04, 2017 07:51:09 AM by Douglas Arndell | |
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."
Many of our ideas about the world are based more on feelings than facts, sensibilities than science, and rage than reality. We gravitate toward ideas that make us feel comfortable in areas such as religion, politics, philosophy, social justice, love and sex, humanity, and morality. We avoid ideas that make us feel uncomfortable. This avoidance is a largely unconscious process that affects our judgment and gets in the way of our ability to reach rational and reasonable conclusions. By understanding how our mind works in this area, we can start embracing uncomfortable ideas and be better informed, be more understanding of others, and make better decisions in all areas of life.
* This is for the author's bookstore only. Applies to autographed hardcover, audiobook, and ebook.