# Spot the Fallacy (Game)



## Mahlerian (Nov 27, 2012)

One person writes a _hypothetical_ argument that uses a fallacy from the Wikipedia list and the person who correctly identifies the fallacy may give the next argument.

It is best to create arguments on neutral topics, because the important thing is not tearing down any positions. Identifying a fallacy in someone's argument does not negate their conclusion.

*Hypothetical arguments about politically contentious topics are discouraged. Quotes from elsewhere on the site may not be used.*

I will begin.

__________________________________________

The whole business of constructing logical arguments is something I've never had much interest in. In fact, I'll say that it's worthless to even try. It's true that if we could use logic as a way of determining absolute truth then knowing how to construct logical arguments would be worthwhile, but there's no way logic in itself can determine absolute truth.


----------



## TurnaboutVox (Sep 22, 2013)

I suppose this is a kind of propositional fallacy.

You assert that * logic could be worthwhile [A] if it could be used to determine absolute truth, but then state that [not A] as it can't, [not B] it's worthless. That's the fallacy - that <if A then B> implies <if not A then not B>, which it doesn't necessarily.*


----------



## Mahlerian (Nov 27, 2012)

Correct, that is what I had in mind. Comments on the format? Perhaps topics should be proposed by the prior poster?


----------



## Guest (Mar 13, 2016)

You know, Mahlerian, that I respect you very much but I do predict a rather short shelf-life for this thread. 
Don't let any perceived nay-saying on my behalf prevent thoroughly full-bloodied responses to your OP.
Let the _ludos_ begin !!
In the meantime, may I invite TC members to check out this link: http://viz.co.uk/mr-logic-gets-pulled-speeding/


----------



## TurnaboutVox (Sep 22, 2013)

Interesting format, it'll be interesting to see how the thread develops. I think you might have an advantage, M! 

I suggest allowing the 'solver' to decide on the next topic and pose the next fallacy.


----------



## SeptimalTritone (Jul 7, 2014)

The wikipedia list is really, really, long...

Anyway, here's a small one for you guys to chew on.

"God is love. Love exists in this world. Therefore, God exists."


----------



## Mahlerian (Nov 27, 2012)

That looks like a case of equivocation. Love is being used in two different senses for the different propositions.


----------



## SeptimalTritone (Jul 7, 2014)

Huh... that's not exactly what I had in mind.

I think the fallacy is the usage of the word "is" in the first sentence. "Is" is not a statement of reflexive equality, but a statement of subset inclusion in this context.


----------



## trazom (Apr 13, 2009)

Mahlerian said:


> That looks like a case of equivocation. Love is being used in two different senses for the different propositions.


Says the poster with such a ridiculous avatar!


----------



## Chris (Jun 1, 2010)

Mahlerian said:


> That looks like a case of equivocation. Love is being used in two different senses for the different propositions.


I think it's the Fallacy of Affirming the Consequent.


----------



## Mahlerian (Nov 27, 2012)

Chris said:


> I think it's the Fallacy of Affirming the Consequent.


I don't see the first premise as an If/then. I understand what Septimal was going for too. (By the way, Trazom's comment looks like another fallacy here...)


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

All cats are mammals. Dogs are mammals. Therefore, dogs are cats.


----------



## Huilunsoittaja (Apr 6, 2010)

I wouldn't know the proper terminology for identifying different kinds of fallacies, so I would have to go "do my homework" first before entering into discussion here.

(And is there a fallacy in that statement?)


----------



## Mahlerian (Nov 27, 2012)

Florestan said:


> All cats are mammals. Dogs are mammals. Therefore, dogs are cats.


That middle is undistributed, all right.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fallacy_of_the_undistributed_middle


----------



## trazom (Apr 13, 2009)

Mahlerian said:


> I don't see the first premise as an If/then. I understand what Septimal was going for too. (By the way, Trazom's comment looks like another fallacy here...)


It was a circumstantial ad hominem. Sorry, I thought someone would get it right away. I see these comments on youtube all the time, "says the person who likes these videos" or "says the poster who..." just really stupid, desperate attempts to invalidate what someone else said even if it has nothing to do with....well, anything really.


----------



## Stavrogin (Apr 20, 2014)

Well, next?


___


----------



## kanishknishar (Aug 10, 2015)

*Make learning fallacies fun!*

I love fallacies, M-Bear. I picked up liking it from the Fallacy Man comics.

Part 1
Part 2

Unlikely that this thread will pick up speed. Spotting fallacies can be an intellectual task, making them deliberately even more so. Understanding the myriads types of fallacies can be a major, difficult and draining task by itself since they're not intuitive. I'll try to do my best.

------------------------------------------*Fallacies*---------------------------------------------​
I. Speaker: "I support the legalization of illegal immigrants via necessary passage of legislation. For they have found hope in this country, they have fled from the shackles of their homeland where light had stopped shining.

But when we legalize these illegals, does the country not suffer? Do our citizens not lose their jobs? Must the government not bear more homeless and destitute; police the rising crime that these jobless will cause?

This is my view and I shan't turn back."

II. The Senator of Uganda: "The year of 2015 has been most fortunate for this great nation. Our GDP has grown tremendously as we overtake both Kenya and Zimbabwe. The rate of crime in our country has decreased so much that we are now more safer than Turkey! It is with great pride that I say that our culture has flourished for we have exhibited twice the number of paintings in our museums than those of Dubai in this year alone!"

III. Leader of Opposition: "You talk about taking $5 from each person in this country every year. What good'll that do? I mean, really, five dollars? Hell, my kid will throw 5 dollars at my face."

IV. "Oh, poor, Mr. M. He's really missing out by not listening to the glorious music of Bruckner."

V. Herrenvolk: "I have made this composition. It's forty minutes long, scored for a knife and three katanas, and 2 bassoons. If you listen to it, you'll become immortal. It costs $67 billions. You can't disprove my claim, hence it is true.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I spent the past two and a half hours reading fallacies. Thank you so much, Mahlerian!


----------



## Stavrogin (Apr 20, 2014)

My guesses:

I. Inductive fallacy (hasty generalization)?

II. Non sequitur?

III. Fallacy of composition?

V. Argument from ignorance?

I have to think some more about the others


----------



## kanishknishar (Aug 10, 2015)

Stavrogin said:


> My guesses:
> 
> I. Inductive fallacy (hasty generalization)?
> 
> ...


All of them are wrong. And its not necessary that one sentence has only one fallacy.


----------



## mstar (Aug 14, 2013)

TalkingHead said:


> http://viz.co.uk/mr-logic-gets-pulled-speeding/


^^^ This. oh my oh my 15 characters!


----------



## Avey (Mar 5, 2013)

Herrenvolk said:


> All of them are wrong. And its not necessary that one sentence has only one fallacy.


This is absurd, and so is your previous post.


----------



## mstar (Aug 14, 2013)

Stavrogin said:


> Well, next?
> 
> ___


Fallacy: assumption.

You assumed there'd be a next round.


----------



## kanishknishar (Aug 10, 2015)

Avey said:


> This is absurd, and so is your previous post.


OK, Mr. Avey, please tell me why is any part of my sentence absurd? Is it so stupefying as to how all of a person's guesses can be wrong?


----------



## Richannes Wrahms (Jan 6, 2014)

I'd suggest also looking here: The Art of Being Right


----------



## Guest (Mar 27, 2016)

Richannes Wrahms said:


> I'd suggest also looking here: The Art of Being Right


I built my career on those. Plus the Secret Six, of course.


----------



## mstar (Aug 14, 2013)

Never mind; I misread something...


----------

