"Fallacy!"-free Fridays on Enworld RPG threads?

[Yesway Jose]

That's not what I said. Dare I say that that's a straw man. By "meaningful discussion," I meant a place where any idea could be discussed in a fruitful way, which is the opposite of how you seem to define it.

How do you presume that I define it? Actually, never mind, not interested.

Next time I have a discussion with my wife, I have to remember to tell her that she's making a "bad argument" and we're not having a "meaningful discussion" <--- smiley face connotes humorous parameters to exclude fallacy declaration that marriage is not analogous to Enworld

If you say "you are being illogical," without explaining what you mean, you are yourself committing a logical fallacy; specifically an ad hominem.

Not interested.

See Umbran? If the Red Sox fan doesn't want to engage in New York Yankees discussion for any reason, whether he lacks the ability, patience or inclination, he has to leave the bar. Post 30 is correct IMO.

 

[Umbran]

See Umbran? If the Red Sox fan doesn't want to engage in New York Yankees discussion for any reason, whether he lacks the ability, patience or inclination, he has to leave the bar. Post 30 is correct IMO.

No, I don't see at all. Not a single person has said you need to "leave the bar". "The bar" is a site with hundreds of active threads. I expect logical fallacies only get mentioned in a few of them. Your response is akin to saying that, when the bar has dart boards and pool tables, and you're not interested in darts, you have to leave when someone asks if you want to play darts. A bit extreme.

 

[1Mac]

You showed enough interest to tell me you weren't interested. Which is interesting!

 

[Yesway Jose]

No, I don't see at all. Not a single person has said you need to "leave the bar". "The bar" is a site with hundreds of active threads. I expect logical fallacies only get mentioned in a few of them. Your response is akin to saying that, when the bar has dart boards and pool tables, and you're not interested in darts, you have to leave when someone asks if you want to play darts. A bit extreme.

Who knows when logical fallacies can raise their ugly heads? They can strike at any time, unexpected. You're correct that nobody "needs to leave the bar". The correct (cough, cough, anal-retentive) articulation is that the Red Sox fan does not subjectively enjoy being there, and would leave to go to a cool party with hot chicks.

 

[Umbran]

I just don't understand why Yankees fans and Red Sox fans can't simply enjoy talking about the thing they both love - Baseball!

One word: tribalism.

Humans are wired to divide the universe into Them and Us.

 

[TwoSix]

Because even if your wife isn't wrong, she is making a bad argument, and if the point is to be persuasive, you aren't going to get anywhere with a bad argument.

"Fallacy!"-free Friday would lead to a discussion board where meaningful discussion is impossible.

Yep. I have to have discussions with my wife, whether they're rational or not, assuming I want to continue to engage in other meaningful exchanges.

You guys here, I like you and all, but if I'm not getting something intellectual out of the process, it's a waste of my time.

 

[wrecan]

Who knows when logical fallacies can raise their ugly heads?

Um... logicians?

 

[Yesway Jose]

Who knows when logical fallacies can raise their ugly heads?

Um... logicians?

Well, you know, what they say: Never argue with a 90 degree angle. It's always right.

 

[Umbran]

The correct (cough, cough, anal-retentive) articulation

Okay, if you are going to call seeing a difference between "must leave the bar" and "chooses to leave the bar" anal-retentive, then I think we don't have the same understanding of the meaning of the word.

 

[Yesway Jose]

Okay, if you are going to call seeing a difference between "must leave the bar" and "chooses to leave the bar" anal-retentive, then I think we don't have the same understanding of the meaning of the word.

I stated "has to leave the bar", not "must leave the bar" and that statement was a reference to post 30 which was about an analogy of a Red Sox fan being (or feeling) misplaced in a New York Yankees bar. In real-life, people often say "I have to" instead of "I feel I have to" which is incorrect but forgivable considering that many people don't have the time and inclination to speak in perfectly correct prose all the time, and it's forgivable if they're given the benefit of the doubt. I think "anal-retentive" in this context (which I *implied* with the 'cough, cough') is when the spirit or intent behind a statement is not given the benefit of the doubt and is instead presumed to be taken literally, like Wrecan's joke about the logician, and the response is extraneous to the original intent.