Read on Twitter
LOGICAL FALLACIES are extremely common in political talk. But knowledge of them seems increasingly rare.
I& #39;ve identified the 21 commonest fallacies in political talk, and will be tweeting about one per day. (RT freely!) The first is below.
https://abs.twimg.com/emoji/v2/... draggable="false" alt="👇" title="Rückhand Zeigefinger nach unten" aria-label="Emoji: Rückhand Zeigefinger nach unten">
#PoliticsatHull #politicalphilosophy
I& #39;ve identified the 21 commonest fallacies in political talk, and will be tweeting about one per day. (RT freely!) The first is below.
#PoliticsatHull #politicalphilosophy
#LogicalFallacy 1. The ARGUMENTUM AD HOMINEM
The speaker is attacked rather than the substance of his argument. It is supposed that the claim is falsified by the speaker& #39;s attributes. It& #39;s a #nonsequitur & a type of #redherring.
eg. "Tim says tax is theft, but Tim is stupid."
The speaker is attacked rather than the substance of his argument. It is supposed that the claim is falsified by the speaker& #39;s attributes. It& #39;s a #nonsequitur & a type of #redherring.
eg. "Tim says tax is theft, but Tim is stupid."
A common variant in political talk is the CIRCUMSTANTIAL AD HOMINEM:
The speaker& #39;s situation, or the benefit he is said to derive from advancing an argument, is supposed to prove that his argument is wrong. #nonsequitur #redherring
eg. "Tim says tax is theft, but Tim is rich."
The speaker& #39;s situation, or the benefit he is said to derive from advancing an argument, is supposed to prove that his argument is wrong. #nonsequitur #redherring
eg. "Tim says tax is theft, but Tim is rich."
