Re: Questions and answers...

[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ The Taxonomy Forum ]

Posted by Eric on June 26, 2002 at 14:57:34:

In Reply to: Re: Questions and answers... posted by Travis on June 26, 2002 at 12:51:36:

Travis,

: I would agree (somewhat) as to how you have stated the above, however it seems to be a shift from your previous postings.

Yes I stand corrected! Thank you.

:And their mandate doesn't guarantee success, at least by the criteria I would use.

Then this is a matter of opinion. I have made my case and you have made yours.

: In addition to circularity, I would also add a fallacy of relevance in your appeal to authority or popularity.

Well you are simply wrong about this being circular. My conclusion does follow from my premises, but both premises are required. This is the standard form of an argument.
It is important to realize that premise 1 is my opinion, premise 2 is a fact. If you agree with my opinion, then the conclusion follows. If not this is a difference of opinion not a logical fallacy.

On the subject of a fallacy of relevance, I think it is relavant that the 'Big 3' advocate one list, and I think I have made it clear why. You may of course disagree but that does not make the above a logical fallacy.

:Not that this isn't to be expected, it is however, in my opinion, flawed.

Clearly you have made a mistake here. Formal logic is not a matter of opinion. Whether my argument is or it isn't flawed is a matter of fact.

Cheers,
Eric

Follow Ups:

Post a Followup

Name:
E-Mail:

Subject:

Comments:
: Travis, : : I would agree (somewhat) as to how you have stated the above, however it seems to be a shift from your previous postings. : Yes I stand corrected! Thank you. : :And their mandate doesn't guarantee success, at least by the criteria I would use. : Then this is a matter of opinion. I have made my case and you have made yours. : : In addition to circularity, I would also add a fallacy of relevance in your appeal to authority or popularity. : Well you are simply wrong about this being circular. My conclusion does follow from my premises, but both premises are required. This is the standard form of an argument. : It is important to realize that premise 1 is my opinion, premise 2 is a fact. If you agree with my opinion, then the conclusion follows. If not this is a difference of opinion not a logical fallacy. : On the subject of a fallacy of relevance, I think it is relavant that the 'Big 3' advocate one list, and I think I have made it clear why. You may of course disagree but that does not make the above a logical fallacy. : : :Not that this isn't to be expected, it is however, in my opinion, flawed. : : Clearly you have made a mistake here. Formal logic is not a matter of opinion. Whether my argument is or it isn't flawed is a matter of fact. : Cheers, : Eric

Optional Link URL:
Link Title:
Optional Image URL:

[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ The Taxonomy Forum ]