Thats not an argument
I see a pattern among members who arent that bright but who want to sound bright: claim everything is a fallacy, and use the phrase That isnt an argument like a magic wand, just wave it over anything you dont like, cant understand, or cant engage with.
It sounds very authoritative, doesnt it? Thats not an argument. It strikes me as a person imitating someone who uses it appropriately, but who really doesnt understand the implications. Like doing an impression.
Thats a fallacy of xyz
Thats not an argument!
As if theyre the final arbiters because they just took freshman logic.
What a waste of time Id like to see this stupid shit go away.
It sounds very authoritative, doesnt it? Thats not an argument. It strikes me as a person imitating someone who uses it appropriately, but who really doesnt understand the implications. Like doing an impression.
Thats a fallacy of xyz
Thats not an argument!
As if theyre the final arbiters because they just took freshman logic.
What a waste of time Id like to see this stupid shit go away.
Comments (56)
An argument is the presenting of reasons/evidence for a claim or conclusion. Really that simple.
:rofl: Too bad for me!
You excel at 1/5th of those! :wink:
There is nothing wrong with pointing out a fallacy or saying "that's not an argument" so long as they at least offer an explanation for their comments.
But I sometimes would call out a post and drop something like that (and not provide the reason for my comment) -- but this is only because I know that poster is smart enough to get my point.
Sorry, but simply saying there is nothing wrong with it is not an argument.
:wink:
Quoting Mikie
Oh the irony. It burns. It burns.
These comments come from a person who never addresses the issues that are raised, and who calls the person raising the issues a "denier" (similar to saying "that isnt an argument"). There is no explanation given. Is Mikie a member who isn't that bright, but who wants to sound bright? The label "denier" is used like a magic wand, just wave it over anything you dont like, cant understand, or cant engage with. What a waste of time Id like to see this stupid shit go away.
Could you, just for conveniences sake, point out exactly what your argument is here. I might be wrong but I think you skipped directly to the conclusion which means, wait for it...........
Thats not an argument!
Am I the only who was reminded of Crocodile Dundee?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_vW54lAtldI&ab_channel=Movieclips
:scream:
Oh yes, I remember: "This is a philosophy forum." and "That's begging the question."
A man logs in to "The Philosophy Forum".
Man: Ah. I'd like to philosophize, please.
Mikie: What do YOU want?
Man: Well, I would like to ask some questions about climate change...
Mikie: Don't give me that, you snotty-faced heap of parrot droppings! You are obviously a "DENIER".
Man: What?
Mikie: You are a selfish jerk. You have been sucked in by the oil companies. I wouldn't be surprised if you were being paid to deny things.
Man: But I came here to philosophize.
Mikie: OH! Oh! I'm sorry! This is abuse!
That really isn't an argument.
Yes it is !!!
Very well reasoned, too; compelling.
Oh god, yes. I nearly forgot about that one. How many people who use begging the question actually know what it means? Maybe 10%, in my experience. The ones who do understand it almost never use it.
I think people just like trotting out terms they think come from philosophy. About the only thing that occurs regularly is strawmaning, which isnt so complicated.
They usually mean something like : "That gives rise to another question"
I let it slide, even from people who quote irrelevant swathes of Wittgenstein at me, because the original meaning is poorly named. Probably clumsy translation from ancient Greek or summut. I would very much prefer they accused me of circular reasoning, because I can at least refute that.
In fact, " raise a question or point that has not been dealt with; invite an obvious question." is listed by online Oxford as the #1 definition now,
while the fallacy "assume the truth of an argument or proposition to be proved, without arguing it" has slipped to #2.
Who are you disagreeing with?
Or do you disagree with everyone? :grin:
Nobody is expected to argue about anything, but everyone is expected to provide arguments for their points of view, beliefs and the statements they make.
Let me try again.
Quoting Mikie
Everything you said in the OP are statements of things you believe to be true, but there is no prof of what you say. Are we expected to just take your word for it that everything you say is true?
:yawn:
Dont overthink it. This is an opinion piece. Or better: a rant piece in which I express my annoyance at stupid bullshit.
Lol. I was making an opinion, not an argument. Taste is always an opinion, and everyone is entitled to one. :wink:
Every statement? Every POV? Every belief?
Conversations could get really, really cumbersome. How be, we just provide links to authoritative sources for statements of fact, acknowledge our personal opinion, belief or perspective, and provide arguments only for philosophical positions?
Just fucking with you.
Fair enough.
Sorry. I missed it. I was busy in another thread trying to appease the random followers.
I mean, I did add that winking emoji.
Hah! With you, nothing is certain even with the emoji. Just so you know.
Im a volatile one, I admit.
Great! Know thyself.
Yes. Unless those agree with me. Then they can remain unjustified. The justification is already found within me.
Imagine for a second this twisted metaphysical situation: one puts oneself on his ignore list, but it turns out that this is precisely what attracts the attention of the rest of the users. Yet the user who deliberately put himself on his own ignore list remains unnoticed by this fact.
PD: I don't know how I ended up with the above conclusion. I mistakenly put a strange liquid in my coffee this morning.
I particularly like the idea of the facts not noticing me. Please share that strange liquid with me!
Well, my liquid has particularly a very strong taste, and it is more reasonable to mix it up with coffee.
I am referring to anise:
I rarely see people actually doing this in here. It's more common than in other places online, but it's still mostly anecdotal and emotional reasoning and when questioned they tantrum because what they were so convinced of in their own mind ended up going through normal scrutiny.
I think there's a point in not just focusing on making a proper argument. In order for a philosophical discussion to take place, people need to abandon their emotions about their argument and treat it as someone else's argument. Detachement to ones ideas is the only way to not fall into bias and fallacy.
So, start out with the argument, and then treat any following discussion in which people object to it as you yourself being part of them discussing someone else's idea. As soon as the argument is presented, don't act as if you own it or else you will start protecting it with your life.
I'm often calling out fallacies and biases, but it's because they're so common among people who aren't well versed in how to rationally treat their own convictions with detachement. A core tenet in philosophy is to question yourself as part of the scrutiny of a formed idea, but most of the time people are just planting their concepts and ideas as flags on a battlefield before going to war for that flag.
But I agree that some are sloppy in their use of calling out fallacies and biases. Many call out fallacies that aren't fallacies, lacking knowledge of what certain fallacies really are and just wave it around as a shield to any form of scrutiny. But generally, the same people doing that are also the ones committing most of the fallacies themselves.
The main problem on this forum is rather that when people create their arguments, they aren't actually presenting any evidence or rational logic behind their reasoning. They cook up whatever they believe is evidence and then try to demand it be enough to prove their point, ending up going in circles saying "I've already presented the evidence".
Generally, a majority of people do not have the necessary knowledge of how to make actual arguments or how to decode arguments. So most people will just go around in circles, failing to grow their knowledge even in a place dedicated to grow knowledge.
I'll have to remember that. I guess my posts are about get longer and somewhat top-heavy.
Oh dear, I thought we were talking about posts on the forum, the OP in particular.
Quoting Vera Mont
But we could just make it one of those unwritten rules that when people post something that is nothing more than an opinion of other people (read RANT), they should state what they are doing from the beginning. That would at least make sense and everyone could just ignore it.
Everyone is entitled to their opinion, but they should have reasons for them. And they should be able to state those reasons clearly. Otherwise we have what the something like the OP is and claims to be against, just a bunch of statements.
There are 'shoulds' and there are varying degrees of willingness to adhere to them, and varying degrees of accuracy in self-assessment. Sometimes we believe we have made a reasoned argument, but another person either doesn't follow it, or doesn't read it accurately, or categorizes as coming from a particular perspective and rejects it without consideration, or deliberately misrepresents it as meaning or "implying"* something quite different. Sometimes we believe we have made a cogent, convincing argument which in reality is incoherent, implausible, not grounded in reality or simply inarticulate. And sometimes we know in our heads what we intend to convey, but the English translation falls short.
*one of my favourite offensive missiles
So at first I thought you were joking now I realize youre exactly the kind of goofball I was talking about. You actually come here and say saying thats not an argument is annoying when its misused is not an argument.
Actually, it is. Yes, its also a rant post, but there are reasons given: people improperly use the phrase for anything they dont understand or dont agree with, basically to sound smart. Ive encountered it many times. When people do that, its annoying. Thats my argument. Its not word salad, and its not ONLY I hate when people say xyz.
Not more complicated than that. You seem to be struggling with it, but its likely because you often employ the phrase yourself and take offense to the OP. Too bad. Dont like it, feel free to fuck off.
That's the most compelling argument I've read today.
Can't wait to see what pearls of wisdom tomorrow coughs up!
That one was more of a statement. An encouragement, if you will. As in, I encourage you to fuck off and to stick your nonsense up your ass.
But I agree its compelling.
Quoting Mikie
How's about that, I guess that you being the only one around here that really knows anything must make that true then.
Just to make sure, let's check out the OP.
Quoting Mikie
Statement of opinion, no reason for your opinions given in this paragraph.
Quoting Mikie
This is a question, I guess even you have figured out that there is no need to give a reason for it.
Quoting Mikie
Statement of opinion, no reason for your opinions given in this paragraph.
Quoting Mikie
I suppose these are examples of what pisses you off, but that does not make them reason for why or how they do so nor what is wrong about them.
Quoting Mikie
Statement of opinion, no reason for your opinions given in this paragraph.
So I guess that the score is something like this:
Statement of opinion - 3
Questions - 1
Examples - 2
Reasons - 0
If you disagree, that is your problem.
A long time ago, on the old forum, I wrote a post about the same thing. About wankers that have taken an introduction to philosophy course in high school and thought that the 5 ideas they got from reading about ten philosophers were the only ones that counted and everyone else was dumb because they did not agree with them.
But I did give explanations and tried to discuss and engage with the rest of the posters.I did not usually tell them to fuck off for disagreeing with me. I would if they started personal attacks and name calling like 5th grades fighting in the school yard, as you have shown an aptitude for doing.
If you did not have your head stuck so far up your arse that you can lick your own cerebellum you might have responded more reasonably when I posted this.
Quoting Sir2u
All you had to do was say "I am just ranting there is no argument there". But no, you had to do just what you accuse others of doing and start talking shit and insulting other posters.
I think that the only thing you said that was worth reading, because it applies to your post, is the following.
What a waste of time Id like to see this stupid shit go away.
Goodbye and thank for the entertainment.
[/noreplytothismessage]
No, a descriptive statement based on experience. You know, an observation. But its hilarious you think its an opinion that needs reasons.
I notice a lot of people are falling down stairs.
Thats your opinion! What are your REASONS for this opinion? Not an argument!
Good lord.
Quoting Sir2u
Cool.
Quoting Sir2u
I did I had a laugh, thinking it was a joke. When you started going on about it, I was quickly disabused of that notion.
Try to read the room a little better. This rant piece is me offering an observation and, yes, an argument. Its very personal and not meant to be taken too seriously. Yes, of course not everyone uses the phrase wrong. Yes, the definition I offer for argument isnt the final word on the matter. Yes, it doesnt really annoy me as much as I let on thats just a little humor, you see. Etc.
Why anyone would choose to turn a goofy post (in the lounge) about people over-using a phrase into a serious academic discussion is beyond me. But you do you. Ill give you the last word if you like thats all I have to say.
How very odd! I would be curious as to why this should be the case. I would not demand reasons, but I would certainly wonder about them.
Since I notice no people at all falling down stairs, I have to ask: Does Mikie live or work in a building with exceptionally perilous stairwells? Is there no elevator for the elderly and handicapped? Are the people among whom Mikie lives particularly clumsy, or is there something in the atmosphere that affects their equilibrium? Is he perhaps pushing people down stairs as an experiment or entertainment?
Mikie lives in his mother's basement.
There are steep stairs going down to the basement.
Any friends visiting Mikie are likely to fall down the stairs and injure themselves.
Luckily Mikie doesn't have any friends. :grin:
:lol:
Touché.
That explains a lot of people. I myself fell down our basement stairs on my wedding day. Metal stair edges, leather sandals, two glasses of wine... I arrived at the buffet table on my elegantly gowned posterior, to thunderous applause and toasts all around. That was a good day.
Were you wearing socks with those sandals? :grin:
With a wedding dress? No. But that reminds me. At City Hall that day, while waiting with our well-dressed friends and relatives, we saw a party of four go in before us: a middle-aged woman in a shapeless dress and sweater and a pouty young man in leather, herding two teenagers in denim - a pregnant girl of about seventeen wearing fallen-down socks with her sneakers and a boy possibly a year older whose pants were too big. It was one of the saddest things I've ever witnessed. I have wondered ever since whether those kids could make a go of life with that kind of start.
(PS I have no idea why I'm reminiscing, except perhaps in an attempt to derail a thread that could get nasty if we're not careful. I don't like nastiness.)