The Philosophical Evolution of an Argument

Super Moderator
User avatar
Posts: 9120
Joined: Fri May 14, 2010 7:03 pm
Location: Inside You.

PostMon Sep 19, 2011 11:14 pm » by Troll2rocks


To completely understand a fallacy, first you must understand how an argument works.

An argument works on one or more premises, with a single conclusion.

A premise is literally a statement, (a sentence said right or wrong) which is offered to support the claim being made, which is also the conclusion. (Again whether correct or false)


There are two kinds of arguments, deductive and inductive.

Deductive arguments are when clear (or apparently clear) evidence has been provided to support the conclusion. Example:

Hey oto look at this video of Selena Gomez fucking Justin Bieber

Inductive arguments are when a premise is provided (or appears to provide) evidence to support the conclusion (but not convincingly). Example:

We never went to the moon


If a premise is made, and the evidence is provided in a deductive manner, then the argument could be considered valid, if the premise turns out to be true.

A fallacy is an error in reasoning, this is not the same as just being wrong about the facts, but that there may well be no facts in order to base the premise on in the first place.

Now a deductive fallacy, is a deductive argument that is invalid, where all of the premises that are provided are true, but that the conclusion reached is wrong.


An inductive fallacy is less formal than a deductive fallacy. They are simply "arguments" which appear to be inductive arguments, but the premises do not provide enough support for the conclusion. In such cases, even if the premises were true, the conclusion would not be more likely to be true.

Do you follow me ?



If so here is a little test for you...



Which categories do you think these fall into.


9-11 was an inside job

Radiation is not as harmful as you think

Alien ruins on the moon

Atlantis

Psychic ability

UFOs being piloted by extraterrestrials


:think: :think: :think: :think: :think: :think: :think: :think: :think: :think: :think: :think: :think: :think: :think: :think: :think: :think: :think: :think:


Well what do you think ?


I shall add that anyone who wants to argue in here, is welcome by me, as in this thread it would actually be of use in driving home the concept....


I will even start you off...

I am telling you now, that we have been to the moon, and I can prove it.


Upload to Disclose.tv

Image
Censorship debunking & disinformation, it's all in a days work.

Conspirator
User avatar
Posts: 1338
Joined: Fri Sep 16, 2011 8:33 pm

PostTue Sep 20, 2011 12:01 am » by Fatbastard


9-11 was an inside job. Inductive.

Radiation is not as harmful as you think. Inductive.

Alien ruins on the moon. Deductive.

Atlantis. Inductive.

Psychic ability. Deductive.

UFOs being piloted by extraterrestrials. Inductive. :dancer:
"Senator. I am not now, nor have I ever been, an oil trader, and neither has anyone on my behalf. I have never seen a barrel of oil, owned one, bought one, sold one, and neither has anyone on my behalf."

Conspirator
User avatar
Posts: 2875
Joined: Wed Oct 06, 2010 7:31 pm
Location: Looking for a city, not built by man!

PostTue Sep 20, 2011 12:41 am » by Truthdefender


fatbastard wrote:9-11 was an inside job. Inductive.

Radiation is not as harmful as you think. Inductive.

Alien ruins on the moon. Deductive.

Atlantis. Inductive.

Psychic ability. Deductive.

UFOs being piloted by extraterrestrials. Inductive. :dancer:


I'd say deductive fallacy.


Upload to Disclose.tv



In Christ are hid all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge
Image

Conspirator
User avatar
Posts: 6298
Joined: Wed Jul 22, 2009 4:06 pm
Location: coast

PostTue Sep 20, 2011 3:06 am » by Mediasorcerer


i dont see the word "perspective" being used here.
with the power of soul,anything is possible
with the power of you,anything that you wanna do

Conspirator
Posts: 6364
Joined: Sat Dec 04, 2010 10:57 pm

PostTue Sep 20, 2011 6:46 am » by Zer0


WTF I could swear I made this exact thread couple of weeks back....

troll2rocks wrote:Hey oto look at this video of Selena Gomez fucking Justin Bieber


Is this just an example? Or a cock teaser for your next thread? Cause thats kinda hot mang....
Master Raphael wrote:what you call the law of attraction was missing a vital aspect to the theory that I call the law of repulsion ...it is clear I drove the two of you together...using my repulsion not attraction

Conspirator
User avatar
Posts: 5992
Joined: Sun Jun 07, 2009 3:38 am
Location: My happy place

PostTue Sep 20, 2011 7:00 am » by Newearthman


otoel wrote:WTF I could swear I made this exact thread couple of weeks back....

troll2rocks wrote:Hey oto look at this video of Selena Gomez fucking Justin Bieber


Is this just an example? Or a cock teaser for your next thread? Cause thats kinda hot mang....

Some time T2R's is too smrt fot his own good :ohno:
Image

Super Moderator
User avatar
Posts: 9120
Joined: Fri May 14, 2010 7:03 pm
Location: Inside You.

PostTue Sep 20, 2011 6:15 pm » by Troll2rocks


mediasorcerer wrote:i dont see the word "perspective" being used here.



Perspective is perspective, however this is is a singular viewpoint, there is only ever one given truth that is actually correct in total.
Image
Censorship debunking & disinformation, it's all in a days work.

Conspirator
User avatar
Posts: 1338
Joined: Fri Sep 16, 2011 8:33 pm

PostTue Sep 20, 2011 6:59 pm » by Fatbastard


Perspective is perspective, allowing for the complete absence of outside perceptions. To be self perspective, in this preceived, perspective perception. You would have to know if your perceived perceptions are the perspective ones. :dancer:
"Senator. I am not now, nor have I ever been, an oil trader, and neither has anyone on my behalf. I have never seen a barrel of oil, owned one, bought one, sold one, and neither has anyone on my behalf."



  • Related topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post
Visit Disclose.tv on Facebook