|
|
Inflation to ConflictI see Inflation to Conflict as what we do with our political parties. We are unconvinced that politicians of either party have the correct answer for issues, and we subsequently we say they're both wrong and respect them less as a consequence. If it's the case I'm right, this seems to be a fairly common fallacy. Would this a be a correct interpretation of the fallacy?
|
| asked on Monday, Jul 30, 2018 10:19:50 AM by Jonathan Thomas | |
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."
Dr. Bo is creating online courses in the area of critical thinking, reason, science, psychology, philosophy, and well-being. These courses are self-paced and presented in small, easy-to-digest nuggets of information. Use the code FALLACYFRIENDS to get 25% off any or all of Dr. Bo's courses.
|
|
A big part of this fallacy is concluding that nothing meaningful can be said about the issue because of the disagreement. Most people who disagree with politicians will still have their own opinion on what should be done.
|
| answered on Monday, Jul 30, 2018 11:29:47 AM by Bo Bennett, PhD |
Comments |
|
| |