Quote:
Originally Posted by Kaijo
I'd encourage you to take a debate class, as I think you'll find the real purpose very illuminating. And think of the fallacies as a way to train your mind, like the way you'd train a horse for horse racing. If you are going to horse race, you're gonna wanna develop the best horse in order to compete, right? Lastly, even if you think you know some things in a debate are unfair, odds are without knowing all the fallacies, your opponent will commit some and you won't even see it. So you'll feel as if you are losing the argument, because you didn't properly prepare.
Without fallacies, without proper preparation, then any debate online is truly just a shouting match.
|
Let me clarify: I have nothing against fallacies. It's confining them to labels that I take issue with. I've learned quite a bit about about fallacies myself, but if you happen to spot one, take the time to express exactly what was wrong with argument rather that spouting obscure Latin jargon. Of course, there are some that have permeated the realm of everyday discussion, and I take no issue with those. But on the whole, I liken learning about fallacies to riding a bike with training wheels. They only serve as a guide when forming arguments, but they're just that. A truly rational mind should able to spot such logical inconsistencies without learning about fallacies to begin with.
Not every debate is held between Philosophy or Law majors. All I'm saying is to use such labels within context so that everyone can understand what the heck you want to say.