Religion and Ethics Forum

Religion and Ethics Discussion => Philosophy, in all its guises. => Topic started by: Walt Zingmatilder on February 06, 2017, 07:22:50 PM

Title: The quick guide to Dodgy fallacies.
Post by: Walt Zingmatilder on February 06, 2017, 07:22:50 PM
Step 1: Has the ''fallacy'' been outlined by an antitheist
Step 2: Google the ''fallacy''. If the first entries direct you to sites like RationalWiki you know were on dodgy ground.
Title: Re: The quick guide to Dodgy fallacies.
Post by: Sebastian Toe on February 06, 2017, 07:30:24 PM
Step 1: Has the ''fallacy'' been outlined by an antitheist
Step 2: Google the ''fallacy''. If the first entries direct you to sites like RationalWiki you know were on dodgy ground.
How do you determine if the author in question is an "antitheist" before you get to step 1?
Title: Re: The quick guide to Dodgy fallacies.
Post by: Walt Zingmatilder on February 06, 2017, 07:44:35 PM
How do you determine if the author in question is an "antitheist" before you get to step 1?
On this forum? Are you kidding me.
Title: Re: The quick guide to Dodgy fallacies.
Post by: Sebastian Toe on February 06, 2017, 09:06:23 PM
On this forum? Are you kidding me.
This forum. Another forum. Any forum.
Or was that just another of your vlassertions?
Title: Re: The quick guide to Dodgy fallacies.
Post by: Outrider on February 07, 2017, 04:18:45 PM
Step 1: Has the ''fallacy'' been outlined by an antitheist

Argumentum ad hominem - that's a fallacy, to be clear. Either it's a fallacy or it's not, who has cited it is irrelevant.

Quote
Step 2: Google the ''fallacy''. If the first entries direct you to sites like RationalWiki you know were on dodgy ground.

Guilt by association - that's a fallacy, to be clear. Where you find the explanation of the fallacy doesn't matter, unless the formulation is incorrect.

O.
Title: Re: The quick guide to Dodgy fallacies.
Post by: Owlswing on February 08, 2017, 03:24:39 AM
Step 1: Has the ''fallacy'' been outlined by an antitheist
Step 2: Google the ''fallacy''. If the first entries direct you to sites like RationalWiki you know were on dodgy ground.

Was it posted by Vlad - if "Yes" it is almost 100% certain to be a logical fallacy (in his case should be spelled phallacy) of one kind or another.
Title: Re: The quick guide to Dodgy fallacies.
Post by: jeremyp on February 08, 2017, 01:56:40 PM
Argumentum ad hominem - that's a fallacy, to be clear. Either it's a fallacy or it's not, who has cited it is irrelevant.

Guilt by association - that's a fallacy, to be clear. Where you find the explanation of the fallacy doesn't matter, unless the formulation is incorrect.

O.

I was going to ask if you are an antitheist, but Rationalwiki didn't come up when I Googled those fallacies, so it doesn't matter.
Title: Re: The quick guide to Dodgy fallacies.
Post by: Jack Knave on February 09, 2017, 06:25:41 PM
How do you determine if the author in question is an "antitheist" before you get to step 1?
Vlad has 'special' sensors for this...
Title: Re: The quick guide to Dodgy fallacies.
Post by: Walt Zingmatilder on February 09, 2017, 07:06:23 PM
Vlad has 'special' sensors for this...
A specially adapted colander and a couple of duracells should do it.
Title: Re: The quick guide to Dodgy fallacies.
Post by: Jack Knave on February 09, 2017, 07:38:40 PM
A specially adapted colander and a couple of duracells should do it.
Vlaaaad! Don't give your secret away or we will all want one.
Title: Re: The quick guide to Dodgy fallacies.
Post by: Outrider on February 10, 2017, 11:50:00 AM
A specially adapted colander and a couple of duracells should do it.

Are you allowed to don the religious paraphernalia of a better different religion?

http://tinyurl.com/qhhnkrn (Daily Telegraph)

O.
Title: Re: The quick guide to Dodgy fallacies.
Post by: Walter on February 10, 2017, 01:28:30 PM
Are you allowed to don the religious paraphernalia of a better different religion?

http://tinyurl.com/qhhnkrn (Daily Telegraph)

O.
Luvit!
Title: Re: The quick guide to Dodgy fallacies.
Post by: Walt Zingmatilder on February 10, 2017, 06:28:32 PM
Are you allowed to don the religious paraphernalia of a better different religion?

http://tinyurl.com/qhhnkrn (Daily Telegraph)

O.
Who'd have thought it......a colander wearing an atheist.

Title: Re: The quick guide to Dodgy fallacies.
Post by: Owlswing on February 10, 2017, 10:47:46 PM

Who'd have thought it......a colander wearing an atheist.


Final proof of the blindness of some Christians who cannot see the difference between an atheist wearing a colander and a colander wearing an atheist.
Title: Re: The quick guide to Dodgy fallacies.
Post by: Outrider on February 12, 2017, 08:35:10 PM
Who'd have thought it......a colander wearing an atheist.

My pastafarian friends will no doubt be disappointed to know that you're discriminating against them - they've worked hard to achieve 'anti-theist' status, you know...

O.
Title: Re: The quick guide to Dodgy fallacies.
Post by: Harrowby Hall on February 13, 2017, 11:35:54 AM
My pastafarian friends will no doubt be disappointed to know that you're discriminating against them - they've worked hard to achieve 'anti-theist' status, you know...

O.

.. and for them a colander is a sacred vessel.
Title: Re: The quick guide to Dodgy fallacies.
Post by: Sebastian Toe on February 13, 2017, 12:08:55 PM
.. and for them a colander is a sacred vessel.
And a very holey one at that!
Title: Re: The quick guide to Dodgy fallacies.
Post by: Walt Zingmatilder on February 13, 2017, 01:53:23 PM
.. and for them a colander is a sacred vessel.
Sorry your argument is so full of holes you could strain pasta through it.