Login required to started new threads

Login required to post replies

Logical Fallacies -- A Fun List
Quote | Reply
Not saying I haven't employed a few of these in my day, or seen more than a few deployed here in the LR... ;-)

Ad Hominem:
This is the best logical fallacy, and if you disagree with me, well, you suck.

Appeal to False Authority:
Your logical fallacies aren’t logical fallacies at all because Einstein said so. Einstein also said that this one is better.

Appeal to Emotion:
See, my mom, she had to work three jobs on account of my dad leaving and refusing to support us, and me with my elephantitis and all, all our money went to doctor’s bills so I never was able to get proper schooling. So really, if you look deep down inside yourself, you’ll see that my fallacy here is the best.

Appeal to Fear:
If you don’t accept Appeal to Fear as the greatest fallacy, then THE TERRORISTS WILL HAVE WON. Do you want that on your conscience—that THE TERRORISTS WILL HAVE WON because you were a pansy who didn’t really think that Appeal to Fear was worth voting for, and you wanted to vote for something else? Of course not, and neither would the people you let die because THE TERRORISTS WILL HAVE WON.

McGroarty’s Logical Fallacies — fun list – Stephen Hicks, Ph.D.
Quote Reply
Re: Logical Fallacies -- A Fun List [big kahuna] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Appeal to authority does not have to be an appeal false authority in order to be a logical fallacy.

”look, duffy is a great lover. the best!” -

slowman (owner of slowtwitch.com) 10/01/17
Quote Reply
Re: Logical Fallacies -- A Fun List [Duffy] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Duffy wrote:
Appeal to authority does not have to be an appeal false authority in order to be a logical fallacy.

Informal fallacies arent always fallacies. For example, calling someone names is an ad hominem, but not necessarily an ad hominem fallacy. It would be if you ignored the argument because of the insults.




who's smarter than you're? i'm!
Quote Reply
Re: Logical Fallacies -- A Fun List [veganerd] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
veganerd wrote:
Duffy wrote:
Appeal to authority does not have to be an appeal false authority in order to be a logical fallacy.

Informal fallacies arent always fallacies. For example, calling someone names is an ad hominem, but not necessarily an ad hominem fallacy. It would be if you ignored the argument because of the insults.

You're a dick!

What's the fallacy for when someone points out a fallacy and the person committing the fallacy says that the commitment of the fallacy doesn't automatically make the argument fallacious, even though the argument is, in fact, fallacious?

”look, duffy is a great lover. the best!” -

slowman (owner of slowtwitch.com) 10/01/17
Quote Reply
Re: Logical Fallacies -- A Fun List [Duffy] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Duffy wrote:
veganerd wrote:
Duffy wrote:
Appeal to authority does not have to be an appeal false authority in order to be a logical fallacy.

Informal fallacies arent always fallacies. For example, calling someone names is an ad hominem, but not necessarily an ad hominem fallacy. It would be if you ignored the argument because of the insults.

You're a dick!

What's the fallacy for when someone points out a fallacy and the person committing the fallacy says that the commitment of the fallacy doesn't automatically make the argument fallacious, even though the argument is, in fact, fallacious?

Thats a vitus ;)




who's smarter than you're? i'm!
Quote Reply
Re: Logical Fallacies -- A Fun List [big kahuna] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
tu quoque....appeal to hipocrisy.
Quote Reply
Re: Logical Fallacies -- A Fun List [big kahuna] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Post hoc ergo propter hoc.

Life is full of froth and trouble, two things stand in stone
Kindness in another's troubles, courage in one's own
Quote Reply
Re: Logical Fallacies -- A Fun List [len] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
len wrote:
Post hoc ergo propter hoc.

Post hoc argument. I like it! My reply to post hoc argument usually consists of the below: ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-)


Quote Reply
Re: Logical Fallacies -- A Fun List [big kahuna] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
That cat is a scream. I knew Duffy was fully back when he started posting cat gifs.

Life is full of froth and trouble, two things stand in stone
Kindness in another's troubles, courage in one's own
Quote Reply
Re: Logical Fallacies -- A Fun List [len] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
len wrote:
That cat is a scream. I knew Duffy was fully back when he started posting cat gifs.

Yes, and who knew Mr. Duffy, he-man that he is, was so into cats? ;-)
Quote Reply
Re: Logical Fallacies -- A Fun List [big kahuna] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
big kahuna wrote:
len wrote:
That cat is a scream. I knew Duffy was fully back when he started posting cat gifs.


Yes, and who knew Mr. Duffy, he-man that he is, was so into cats? ;-)

Most of "them" are.... you know the types.
Quote Reply
Re: Logical Fallacies -- A Fun List [big kahuna] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
You called it 'fear'. The terrorists have already won apparently.

-Formerly TriTJ
I talk to myself because mine are the only answers I'll accept - George Carlin
Quote Reply
Re: Logical Fallacies -- A Fun List [Tatonka] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Tatonka wrote:
You called it 'fear'. The terrorists have already won apparently.

If you arent with us then youre against us!
False dillema




who's smarter than you're? i'm!
Quote Reply
Re: Logical Fallacies -- A Fun List [big kahuna] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Another favorite. The strawman argument.

Life is full of froth and trouble, two things stand in stone
Kindness in another's troubles, courage in one's own
Last edited by: len: Sep 11, 17 8:52
Quote Reply
Re: Logical Fallacies -- A Fun List [big kahuna] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
how is slippery slope not at the top of this list?
Quote Reply
Re: Logical Fallacies -- A Fun List [ajthomas] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
ajthomas wrote:
how is slippery slope not at the top of this list?

Because if he puts that one on, then he has to add more and eventually everyone wants theirs added too




who's smarter than you're? i'm!
Quote Reply
Re: Logical Fallacies -- A Fun List [veganerd] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
veganerd wrote:
ajthomas wrote:
how is slippery slope not at the top of this list?


Because if he puts that one on, then he has to add more and eventually everyone wants theirs added too

And then it becomes an unending cycle! ;-)

Hahahahahahahahahahahahaha!
Quote Reply
Re: Logical Fallacies -- A Fun List [Old Hickory] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Old Hickory wrote:
big kahuna wrote:
len wrote:
That cat is a scream. I knew Duffy was fully back when he started posting cat gifs.

Yes, and who knew Mr. Duffy, he-man that he is, was so into cats? ;-)

Most of "them" are.... you know the types.

Well you know, he does like talking about dicks and making fellatious statements...

Duffy wrote:
veganerd wrote:
Informal fallacies arent always fallacies. For example, calling someone names is an ad hominem, but not necessarily an ad hominem fallacy. It would be if you ignored the argument because of the insults.

You're a dick!

What's the fallacy for when someone points out a fallacy and the person committing the fallacy says that the commitment of the fallacy doesn't automatically make the argument fallacious, even though the argument is, in fact, fallacious?
Quote Reply
Re: Logical Fallacies -- A Fun List [OneGoodLeg] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
OneGoodLeg wrote:
Old Hickory wrote:
big kahuna wrote:
len wrote:
That cat is a scream. I knew Duffy was fully back when he started posting cat gifs.


Yes, and who knew Mr. Duffy, he-man that he is, was so into cats? ;-)


Most of "them" are.... you know the types.


Well you know, he does like talking about dicks and making fellatious statements...

Duffy wrote:
veganerd wrote:
Informal fallacies arent always fallacies. For example, calling someone names is an ad hominem, but not necessarily an ad hominem fallacy. It would be if you ignored the argument because of the insults.


You're a dick!

What's the fallacy for when someone points out a fallacy and the person committing the fallacy says that the commitment of the fallacy doesn't automatically make the argument fallacious, even though the argument is, in fact, fallacious?

Probably should just spell that word "Fellatious," given the way this particular portion of the thread is degenerating. ;-)
Quote Reply