The Art of Having a [Forum] Conversation

[宁]

Hello my friends,

 

Just a website i stumbled upon recently, Extremely Informative!

 

http://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/home

 

Please read and follow, also if the mods think it's a good idea, we should work up a solution to make it known by most of the taobums. I think it's an exercise of mental awareness, and should prove a fun way to test your conversation skills, as well as others'.

 

Comments if you please.

 

E.

[Taomeow]

Hello my friends,

 

Just a website i stumbled upon recently, Extremely Informative!

 

http://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/home

 

Please read and follow, also if the mods think it's a good idea, we should work up a solution to make it known by most of the taobums. I think it's an exercise of mental awareness, and should prove a fun way to test your conversation skills, as well as others'.

 

Comments if you please.

 

E.

 

Ahh, finally. Thank you. Been meaning to introduce the list of Logical Fallacies since I don't know when, definitely a great idea. A classic device of self-examination for the development of mental discipline and cognitive honesty. What stopped me was the thought that if folks keep spotting their own arguments as textbook examples of the opposite, some will be at a total loss as to what to say -- ever, about anything! In politics, sales, religious arguments, media dispatches, all of our schooling and, consequently, communication styles of most families, nothing but Logical Fallacies is ever utilized to make a point. Taken to heart, their avoidance is going to cause some to commit to the art of Not-Doing-Of-Speaking.

[Sloppy Zhang]

Ahh, finally. Thank you. Been meaning to introduce the list of Logical Fallacies since I don't know when, definitely a great idea. A classic device of self-examination for the development of mental discipline and cognitive honesty. What stopped me was the thought that if folks keep spotting their own arguments as textbook examples of the opposite, some will be at a total loss as to what to say -- ever, about anything! In politics, sales, religious arguments, media dispatches, all of our schooling and, consequently, communication styles of most families, nothing but Logical Fallacies is ever utilized to make a point. Taken to heart, their avoidance is going to cause some to commit to the art of Not-Doing-Of-Speaking.

 

But what about the fallacy fallacy!

[thelerner]

Looking over the list I don't see a listing for JPS (Just Plain Stupid). Oh well its all Greek to me.

[Taomeow]

But what about the fallacy fallacy!

 

Ah, this one is my favorite. To solve it, one needs a skill similar to the mind examining itself, which some philosophers argue cannot be done. With the taoist "tool kit," however, it can be done by using the xing-ming dichotomy. A fallacy fallacy is committed by ming without necessarily involving xing in its error. If one examines it with ming alone, it's a fallacy, but if one engages xing, it may reveal itself as true despite its logical incongruence. In Western terms, a fallacy fallacy is where the rule of the left brain ends and the rule of the right hemisphere must commence. It is a transition point from linear logic to nonlinear fuzzy logic. Laozi, e.g., is full of such fallacy fallacies, which are, however, not wrong at all. Example:

 

When a wise man hears about the tao, he follows it.

When an average man hears about the tao, he ignores it.

When a fool hears about the tao, he laughs.

If he didn't laugh, it wouldn't be the tao.

 

Nothing in the synthesis arrived at in the last line follows from the thesis presented. From the left brain perspective, it's a mere non sequitur. But from the right brain perspective, it is accurate. The right brain grasps the whole picture which does not rely on logic alone -- it is fuzzy, it's a fog of "knowing," and discerning the shapes of true statements through this fog is a xing skill, a spiritual attainment. It makes all the difference between being smart and being wise.

[Sloppy Zhang]

Looking over the list I don't see a listing for JPS (Just Plain Stupid). Oh well its all Greek to me.

 

Isn't that a breach of the forum rules about respecting everyone and stuff...?

 

Ah, this one is my favorite. To solve it, one needs a skill similar to the mind examining itself, which some philosophers argue cannot be done. With the taoist "tool kit," however, it can be done by using the xing-ming dichotomy. A fallacy fallacy is committed by ming without necessarily involving xing in its error. If one examines it with ming alone, it's a fallacy, but if one engages xing, it may reveal itself as true despite its logical incongruence. In Western terms, a fallacy fallacy is where the rule of the left brain ends and the rule of the right hemisphere must commence. It is a transition point from linear logic to nonlinear fuzzy logic. Laozi, e.g., is full of such fallacy fallacies, which are, however, not wrong at all. Example:

 

When a wise man hears about the tao, he follows it.

When an average man hears about the tao, he ignores it.

When a fool hears about the tao, he laughs.

If he didn't laugh, it wouldn't be the tao.

 

Nothing in the synthesis arrived at in the last line follows from the thesis presented. From the left brain perspective, it's a mere non sequitur. But from the right brain perspective, it is accurate. The right brain grasps the whole picture which does not rely on logic alone -- it is fuzzy, it's a fog of "knowing," and discerning the shapes of true statements through this fog is a xing skill, a spiritual attainment. It makes all the difference between being smart and being wise.

 

Where can I torrent this Taoist toolkit for future use?

[konchog uma]

wonderful site.

 

thanks

[Marblehead]

Well, let me just say here in public that I like arguing with certain people now and then. In these cases I will tell any lie I can think up.

 

While it is nice to be nice being a pain is sometimes fun.

 

Now, where is my textbook on logic?

[Stosh]

Ah, this one is my favorite. To solve it, one needs a skill similar to the mind examining itself, which some philosophers argue cannot be done. With the taoist "tool kit," however, it can be done by using the xing-ming dichotomy. A fallacy fallacy is committed by ming without necessarily involving xing in its error. If one examines it with ming alone, it's a fallacy, but if one engages xing, it may reveal itself as true despite its logical incongruence. In Western terms, a fallacy fallacy is where the rule of the left brain ends and the rule of the right hemisphere must commence. It is a transition point from linear logic to nonlinear fuzzy logic. Laozi, e.g., is full of such fallacy fallacies, which are, however, not wrong at all. Example:

 

When a wise man hears about the tao, he follows it.

When an average man hears about the tao, he ignores it.

When a fool hears about the tao, he laughs.

If he didn't laugh, it wouldn't be the tao.

 

Nothing in the synthesis arrived at in the last line follows from the thesis presented. From the left brain perspective, it's a mere non sequitur. But from the right brain perspective, it is accurate. The right brain grasps the whole picture which does not rely on logic alone -- it is fuzzy, it's a fog of "knowing," and discerning the shapes of true statements through this fog is a xing skill, a spiritual attainment. It makes all the difference between being smart and being wise.

 

Id simplify it to ,"badly argued doesnt mean the point attempted is false"

The thing is, that it requires the "opponent" to help himself lose the point.

 

I would be willing to play the game of 'fallacy naming'

but I dont currently think the subject matter covered here

will allow it to work because so much is subjective.

 

Stosh