posted
I'm taking Introduction to Logic (Philosophy 105) as an accelerated Summer course. The class has been fun so far, but last week I had a sort of "whoa" moment. We started talking about informal fallacies and the professor asked offhand if anyone knew what the different types were, and I didn't, until she started naming off "straw man" and "ad hominem" and more. A smile crept across my face and I raised my hand to explain what those were, and when she asked me where, if not the textbook, I'd experienced them, I laughed and shook my head.
So thank you Hatrack, for an informal education in argumentation and logic. I originally wanted to take the class for two reasons: 1. It counts as my math credit. 2. I thought it'd be great experience for law school. But now I'm adding a third: 3. It's like taking Hatrack 101.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Same thing happened in my Philosophy 2020 class, "Ethics and Values." The professor had a list of things from "Slippery Slope" to "Ad hominem" and I was able to nail almost every single one purely because I had spent time on hatrack.
My wife and I once had a long conversation where I explained all the logical fallacies I could and she has started identifying which ones I stumble into when we have conversations. It's strangely attractive to have your spouse correctly accuse you of committing a logical fallacy.
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Shmuel: On a related note, have you read "Love Is a Fallacy," by Max Shulman?
(Only next time, give a girl a clue. I was very confused when GR couldn't find anything by that title.)
Posts: 32919 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by rivka: (Only next time, give a girl a clue. I was very confused when GR couldn't find anything by that title.)
Sorry, good point. As you've probably figured out, it's a short story, published as part of The Many Loves of Dobie Gillis. There are copies around the Web, though I have doubts about their legality. (On the other hand, the book appears to be out of print, and good luck finding a copy...)
I first read this in 12th-grade English and loved it.
posted
I found it several places online, but didn't link because I agree with your doubts.
I think I may have read it in HS English too; it seems familiar. But as has been pointed out to me several times in the last couple weeks, HS English was a Very Long Time Ago. >_<
Posts: 32919 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Concerning the "harder" fallacies: is-ought fallacy is a very common one appeal to nature intensional is extensional (I'm not actually sure of the name of this one, though a specific type is the "intensional fallacy" which concerns how it affects leibniz' law, but I doubt that's one of the more common types) fallacy in one way or another
Posts: 2705 | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by rivka: Easy enough, if you're willing to spend $45+.
Library has it; maybe my kids will pick it up for me.
The Brooklyn Public Library (my local system) doesn't have it; the New York Public Library system has one reference copy in offsite storage. The City University of New York library system doesn't have a copy, either. Considering that the book was used as the jumping-off point for a movie and a television series that lasted four seasons, this surprises me.
Posts: 884 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[ROFL]](graemlins/rofl.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Angst]](graemlins/angst.gif)
