Comments on: It’s A Trap! http://biblearchive.com/blog/2009/apologetics/its-a-trap/ Thoughts from Plymouth Brethren Blogger Rey Reynoso Wed, 07 Dec 2011 15:10:59 +0000 hourly 1 By: Rey’s A Point » Socialism, Stupidity, and Slant http://biblearchive.com/blog/2009/apologetics/its-a-trap/comment-page-1/#comment-12251 Rey’s A Point » Socialism, Stupidity, and Slant Sat, 17 Apr 2010 04:54:17 +0000 http://biblearchive.com/blog/?p=1538#comment-12251 [...] by conflating definitions and ignoring some pretty basic things. What it’s doing is more like trap setting—it’s letting the reader make the argument and conclusion: since the Government does [...] [...] by conflating definitions and ignoring some pretty basic things. What it’s doing is more like trap setting—it’s letting the reader make the argument and conclusion: since the Government does [...]

]]> By: ARGUMENTICS http://biblearchive.com/blog/2009/apologetics/its-a-trap/comment-page-1/#comment-1556 ARGUMENTICS Wed, 23 Dec 2009 11:52:35 +0000 http://biblearchive.com/blog/?p=1538#comment-1556 Nice article. Just want to stress out a few things. First, none of the techniques is inherently fallacious. I can use vagueness, ambiguity and make dubious analogies without laying the grounds for a charge of fallacy usage. One should always take the context into consideration; in some contexts, such argumentative moves are ignored and passed over, in some, they become fallacies. Second, question-begging ephitets and nouns are (again) not fallacious in themselves. If I call refer to the President as "that pig", the other party might get the point and disregard my name-tag, but it will not be a fallacy. Let us remember that a fallacy is an ARGUMENT. Name-callings are not arguments. Begging the question becomes a fallacy only when it involves circular reasoning and evades proof when arguing (as opposed to 'when describing') Anyway. Nice post! :) Nice article. Just want to stress out a few things. First, none of the techniques is inherently fallacious. I can use vagueness, ambiguity and make dubious analogies without laying the grounds for a charge of fallacy usage. One should always take the context into consideration; in some contexts, such argumentative moves are ignored and passed over, in some, they become fallacies.

Second, question-begging ephitets and nouns are (again) not fallacious in themselves. If I call refer to the President as “that pig”, the other party might get the point and disregard my name-tag, but it will not be a fallacy. Let us remember that a fallacy is an ARGUMENT. Name-callings are not arguments. Begging the question becomes a fallacy only when it involves circular reasoning and evades proof when arguing (as opposed to ‘when describing’)

Anyway. Nice post! :)

]]>