thou shalt not commit logical fallacies

[amused]

heh...

http://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/poster

[klr]

Saved in triplicate

[Hermit]

Fast and loose with the definition. There is an overlap between rhetorical tricks and subterfuges on one hand and logical fallacies on the other, but a list of each is not identical. An ad hominem, for example, is not a logical fallacy, and the gambler's fallacy is not usually employed as a rhetorical trick or subterfuge.

If it wasn't for the clanger inherent in the banner at the bottom and the cheesy graphic at the top, I could quite like the poster. The motivation for producing it appears to be admirable.

[Svartalf]

Saved in triplicate

not in good resolution by half to be worth saving.

[Faithfree]

Saved in triplicate

not in good resolution by half to be worth saving.

The various-sized PDF posters are good resolution.

[Svartalf]

saved in decent size.

[Warren Dew]

Fast and loose with the definition. There is an overlap between rhetorical tricks and subterfuges on one hand and logical fallacies on the other, but a list of each is not identical. An ad hominem, for example, is not a logical fallacy, and the gambler's fallacy is not usually employed as a rhetorical trick or subterfuge.

Agreed. And "slippery slope" is not even a fallacy; if you can show that A will actually lead to bad thing B, that actually is a reason to avoid A.

[Ian]

Fast and loose with the definition. There is an overlap between rhetorical tricks and subterfuges on one hand and logical fallacies on the other, but a list of each is not identical. An ad hominem, for example, is not a logical fallacy, and the gambler's fallacy is not usually employed as a rhetorical trick or subterfuge.

Agreed. And "slippery slope" is not even a fallacy; if you can show that A will actually lead to bad thing B, that actually is a reason to avoid A.

It's not a fallacy when you can show that B happening is a good possibility. But when you're talking about A eventually leading to Z, it becomes a logical fallacy. I've always found slippery slopes to be feeble arguments; they tend to rely on paranoia.

[FBM]

Thanks for that, amused!

I think whether or not a fallacious-sounding statement is strictly speaking a logical fallacy depends ultimately on how you're using that statement in your argument. If you base your conclusion on it, it's a fallacy. Fallacious-sounding statements used otherwise aren't actually fallacies, I think. An ad hom attack, for example, is just an attack unless it's intended to be an essential premise to proving the conclusion.

But there is also the Logical Fallacy Fallacy. Just because an argument contains a logical fallacy doesn't mean that its conclusion is wrong.

[Tyrannical]

Or people forget that an appeal to authority is not a fallacy, when the authority actually is an expert.

[Warren Dew]

Or people forget that an appeal to authority is not a fallacy, when the authority actually is an expert.

Experts are still frequently mistaken, so it's still a fallacy.

[Tyrannical]

Or people forget that an appeal to authority is not a fallacy, when the authority actually is an expert.

Experts are still frequently mistaken, so it's still a fallacy.

No it's not.

[FBM]

My memory of undergrad Logic class isn't perfect, but I seem to recall the prof stressing that it's an appeal to irrelevant authority that's fallacious. Like Michael Jordan telling you which is the best car to buy, Lady Gaga giving musical advice, etc.

[Warren Dew]

My memory of undergrad Logic class isn't perfect, but I seem to recall the prof stressing that it's an appeal to irrelevant authority that's fallacious. Like Michael Jordan telling you which is the best car to buy, Lady Gaga giving musical advice, etc.

Sounds like the excuse of someone with "professor" before his name.

[trdsf]

That is so very saved to my hard drive.