Timeline for Which fallacy was committed here?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
13 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 4, 2020 at 15:16 | comment | added | polcott | @JD en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M%C3%BCnchhausen_trilemma The axiomatic argument, which rests on accepted precepts which are merely asserted rather than defended. We know by semantic tautology. The assignment of symbolic or phonetic labels to semantic meanings may be an arbitrary assertion. The mutually self-defining semantic meanings themselves are no mere assertion. The fact that a baby kitten is not a pile of bricks logical entails that one cannot build a brick wall from a baby kitten. | |
| May 4, 2020 at 14:33 | comment | added | J D | So, by your definition, that which has a logical connection, that is to say possess a degree of certainty to follow, is that which is true. And implicit in that is that truth is determined by logic. Hence, it's logical if it's true but we know it is true because it is logical. Help me out here. How is that not one of the branches of the Agrippan trilemma? | |
| Apr 29, 2020 at 16:13 | comment | added | polcott | @JD A conclusion does follow from its premises if: (1) There are premises (2) it [is] impossible for the premises to be true and the conclusion nevertheless to be false. ------- iep.utm.edu/val-snd ------ A deductive argument is said to be valid if and only if it takes a form that makes it impossible for the premises to be true and the conclusion nevertheless to be false. | |
| Apr 29, 2020 at 15:56 | comment | added | J D | I'll entertain that. By what criteria does one determine whether or not a conclusion can possibly follow? | |
| Apr 27, 2020 at 15:29 | history | edited | polcott | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 188 characters in body
|
| Apr 27, 2020 at 15:29 | comment | added | polcott | @JD This is already aptly named Non Sequitur. A conclusion that is simply asserted without any reasoning is a special case of Non Sequitur in that a conclusion cannot possibly follow from the premises if the premises are missing. | |
| Apr 27, 2020 at 15:27 | comment | added | J D | Thanks for the heads up on the other post! | |
| Apr 27, 2020 at 15:22 | comment | added | J D | Also, your 'baseless assertion fallacy' has already been named aptly the irrelevant conclusion. | |
| Apr 27, 2020 at 15:21 | comment | added | J D | There isn't much of a difference between the two, but I think it might be better to refer to it as appeal to ridicule. | |
| Apr 23, 2020 at 20:07 | history | edited | polcott | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 145 characters in body
|
| Apr 23, 2020 at 20:02 | comment | added | polcott | @JD I found this after the fact. The fallacy that I refer to above has only myself as its source. Prior to earning any reputation points half of my "rebuttals" were simply down votes. Here is another very much less descriptive yet conventional name for this same fallacy: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeal_to_the_stone | |
| Apr 21, 2020 at 17:02 | comment | added | J D | I'm willing to entertain it. Can you cite a source on this for me to reflect on? | |
| Apr 21, 2020 at 4:52 | history | answered | polcott | CC BY-SA 4.0 |