Tweet
Re: Catholics ARE Christians (NTS Fallacy)
Well, it didn't take long, did it? The indirect ad hominem.
Fallacies are violations of the rules of discussion that have the tendency of producing unfounded beliefs in a large proportion when assessing the actual value of these arguments.
Tu quoque is the indirect ad hominem (appeal to person) that I mentioned a few minutes ago. Basically, when using tu quoque (= you, too), the person attacks the opponent by accusing his earlier acts/statements instead of looking at the actual issue.
Here the story goes as follows:
- I noted that your text did not discuss the issues of this Forum but instead your text contained fallacies.
- You (tu quoque): NO, YOU have the fallacies! (even if this were true, your own arguments would still contain the ad hominem, and it is these arguments that you are responsible for)
You see, you refuse to look at your own argumentation but make a counter-attack. It is very common but, again, it has nothing to do with the actual issues. It is irrelevant to the truth value of the proposition. That is why it is a fallacy.
Argument from ignorance is actually something different. It is an argument that says "something is not true because we do not have enough evidence (i.e., we're ignorant of it; e.g., there's no God because we have not enough knowledge about Him). Regarding your argumentation, we are, however, not ignorant as you have provided us with plenty of material in the form of fallacies.
And to finish, you again use personal assertion and an appeal to authority ("I see quite commonly..." - an assertion not backed up by any tangible evidence).
Yours in Christ,
Elmer
Originally posted by Elmer G. White
View Post
. For instance, ad hominem is "appeal to person", and I'm afraid we're going to see the indirect form of this fallacy in the future, as well...
Originally posted by Shadow Fox
View Post
Fallacies are violations of the rules of discussion that have the tendency of producing unfounded beliefs in a large proportion when assessing the actual value of these arguments.
Tu quoque is the indirect ad hominem (appeal to person) that I mentioned a few minutes ago. Basically, when using tu quoque (= you, too), the person attacks the opponent by accusing his earlier acts/statements instead of looking at the actual issue.
Here the story goes as follows:
- I noted that your text did not discuss the issues of this Forum but instead your text contained fallacies.
- You (tu quoque): NO, YOU have the fallacies! (even if this were true, your own arguments would still contain the ad hominem, and it is these arguments that you are responsible for)
You see, you refuse to look at your own argumentation but make a counter-attack. It is very common but, again, it has nothing to do with the actual issues. It is irrelevant to the truth value of the proposition. That is why it is a fallacy.
Argument from ignorance is actually something different. It is an argument that says "something is not true because we do not have enough evidence (i.e., we're ignorant of it; e.g., there's no God because we have not enough knowledge about Him). Regarding your argumentation, we are, however, not ignorant as you have provided us with plenty of material in the form of fallacies.
And to finish, you again use personal assertion and an appeal to authority ("I see quite commonly..." - an assertion not backed up by any tangible evidence).
Yours in Christ,
Elmer
Make the right choice!
or 
Comment