U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Great Debates
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 04-18-2010, 08:30 PM
 
5,762 posts, read 9,459,765 times
Reputation: 3767

Advertisements

What would it be?

I might go ahead and just ban evasion or "what-about"-ism.

So for instance, if someone makes an argument about "X," people would no longer try to squirrel out of the topic altogether by ignoring subject X and bringing up subject "Y" instead.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 04-18-2010, 08:39 PM
 
14,209 posts, read 17,134,946 times
Reputation: 10926
Simple,
"Making an assumption based on another assumption"
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-18-2010, 09:11 PM
 
Location: NW Nevada
12,358 posts, read 9,602,636 times
Reputation: 11300
Quoting bits and pieces of an opposing statement, and/or pasting together from separate statements, to form an out of context and totally false appearance. This tactic is annoying beyond belief!!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-18-2010, 09:31 PM
 
Location: San Diego
497 posts, read 724,938 times
Reputation: 566
I would ban the "god did it" excuse.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-18-2010, 09:42 PM
 
Location: Long Island
1,083 posts, read 1,543,837 times
Reputation: 394
Straw Man

Quote:
A straw man argument is an informal fallacy based on misrepresentation of an opponent's position. To "attack a straw man" is to create the illusion of having refuted a proposition by substituting a superficially similar proposition (the "straw man"), and refuting it, without ever having actually refuted the original position
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-18-2010, 09:46 PM
 
7,139 posts, read 7,446,520 times
Reputation: 21988
I actually have two I will mention.

1. Saying that something is wrong or shouldn't be done because it is "socialistic". I never see anyone who makes this argument actually define socialism. Nor, does anyone point out why if something were "socialistic" why that would make it bad. Is it "socialistic" to have a police force or an army? How about public schools, a health department, and a local sewer department? If these are "socialistic" are they bad?

2. Comparing your opponent and his arguments with either Naziis or Communists. Whenever I hear this argument I automatically decide the person making it has lost his side. This is such an extreme argument that its just silly.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-18-2010, 09:49 PM
 
Location: Victoria TX
42,673 posts, read 66,202,887 times
Reputation: 35481
Banning just one will do no good, because there are so many more to fall back on.

1. Anecdotal evidence. "My uncle smoked a pack a day and lived to be 86, so that proves that smoking is not harmful to your health."

2. Spurious cause-and-effect. "Hot lunches cause crime. The crime rate started going up as soon as schools started subsidizing hot lunch for low income children."

3. The "apples and oranges rebuttal". "That's apples and oranges, so your comparison means nothing."

4. The "Mission Accomplished" proof. "You quit arguing with me, so I must have been right."

5. Misnomers. Using words as though they meant something else. Like using 'socialism' to mean despotic tyranny, or "capitalism" to mean personal liberty.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-19-2010, 10:31 AM
 
314 posts, read 123,959 times
Reputation: 94
Quote:
Originally Posted by jtur88 View Post
Banning just one will do no good, because there are so many more to fall back on.

1. Anecdotal evidence. "My uncle smoked a pack a day and lived to be 86, so that proves that smoking is not harmful to your health."

2. Spurious cause-and-effect. "Hot lunches cause crime. The crime rate started going up as soon as schools started subsidizing hot lunch for low income children."

3. The "apples and oranges rebuttal". "That's apples and oranges, so your comparison means nothing."

4. The "Mission Accomplished" proof. "You quit arguing with me, so I must have been right."

5. Misnomers. Using words as though they meant something else. Like using 'socialism' to mean despotic tyranny, or "capitalism" to mean personal liberty.
Thine quiver would be arrow-less.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-19-2010, 11:13 AM
 
1,474 posts, read 3,968,623 times
Reputation: 545
"It's all about ..." statements
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-19-2010, 11:34 AM
 
7,887 posts, read 5,485,652 times
Reputation: 3224
1) The fallacy of composition: Person X plays for a great team, therefore person X must be a great player. Person X is a great player; therefore, the team person X plays for must be a great team. What is true for the whole cannot be assumed true of its parts and what is true of a part cannot be assumed true for the whole.

2) Ad Hominem fallacy: Person X makes a claim. Person Y cast aspersions upon person X. Therefore, what person X says has been discredited.

3) Straw Man Fallacy: Others have given examples.

4) The absence of evidence is evidence of absence.

5) The snap shot fallacy. Person X observes person Y being hit by person Z. Person X then argues that person Z is in the wrong, based upon that moment in time. This is a fallacy because what happened before that moment in time (snap shot) could alter the conclusion. If person Z was fighting off an unprovoked attack from person Y, then person Z actions are then seen in a different light.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Great Debates
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2017, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32 - Top