False dichotomies and other fallacies RPGers use

[Jeff Wilder]

One person I had in mind was somebody who scored relatively low on various IQ tests when they were a kid. (This person's parents had various IQ tests done). During school, this person ended up in special ed.

Many years later, this person did a PhD in pure mathematics.

And Einstein supposedly failed elementary mathematics. Exceptions occur.

(BTW, did you know that reasoning from specific to general is also a fallacy?)

 

[ggroy]

And Einstein supposedly failed elementary mathematics. Exceptions occur.

Is this via judging Einstein's GPA in the German system, where a lower GPA number is better?

(BTW, did you know that reasoning from specific to general is also a fallacy?)

Of course.

 

[Stormonu]

Another one I thought of, though I have no idea what the technical term might be.

That you can theoretically build a character/monster/scenario that is broken means that it is an actual problem that occurs within the game. (again, pointing towards Pun-pun; theoretically, it is possible to build him, but how many like him actually exist in people's games?).

 

[MortonStromgal]

See I used to think gamers were more intelligent, then I met enough of them (going to cons) to realize no they aren't. Many don't read for pleasure, heck some of them have not even read the rule book they own for the game they play every week. You could argue that GMs maybe are more intelligent (because most have at leased read the rules and enjoy reading) but if you look at everyone who plays as a whole I don't feel there is a significant improvement over non-gamers.

[Edit] I have also met a handful of GMs who will admit that they have not read a book since college and get there ideas from TV or movies. They dont read the rules either thats what rules lawyer player is for.

Is this via judging Einstein's GPA in the German system, where a lower GPA number is better?

No, people who are good at higher level math often have problems crunching basic arithmetic. I'm one of those people, for my college entrance exam I got a perfect score on the calcus and higher math but flunked the arithmetic section. The placement office had no idea what to do with me because I couldn't add or subtract but put me in a number theory class and I'm golden.

 

[ggroy]

And Einstein supposedly failed elementary mathematics.

This may not be the case. From "The Collected Papers of Albert Einstein. Volume 1. (English Translation)" on page xx, Maja Winteler-Einstein (Albert's sister) writes (translated from the original German):

"In Gymnasium, the boy was suppose to begin the study of algebra and geometry at the age of 13. Before that, he already had a predilection for solving complicated problems in applied arithmetic, although the computational errors he made kept him from appearing particularly talented in the eyes of his teachers. Now he wanted see what he can understand about these subjects in advance, during his vacation, and asked his parents to obtain the textbooks for him. Play and playmates were forgotten. He set to work on the theorems, not by taking their proofs from books, but rather by attempting to prove them for himself. For days on end he sat alone, immersed in the search for solution, not giving up before he found it. He often found proofs by ways which were different from those given in the books. Thus, during this one vacation of a few months, he independently worked his way though the entire prospective Gymnasium syllabus. Uncle Jakob, who as an engineer had a comprehensive mathematical education, reinforced Albert's zeal by posing difficult problems, not without good-natured expressions of doubt about his ability to solve them. Albert invariably found a correct proof, and even found an entirely original one for the Pythagorean theorem. When he got such results, the boy was overcome by great happiness, and was already then aware of the direction in which his talents were leading him."

This passage appears to be referenced in Walter Isaacson's Einstein biography "Einstein: His life and Universe" on pages 16-17. Pages 16-17 attempt to refute that Einstein failed mathematics when he was a kid in school.

 

[blargney the second]

IOW, do you believe that Gary Gygax is a major fan of 4e in the afterlife?

No, I don't believe that. I can't explain why because it's against the site rules. Suffice to say, I have no problem with the nouns "Gary Gygax", "major fan", or "4e" in that sentence.

Problem is, it's hard to debate editions with folks from a logical standpoint. People are as fervent about that as they are about religion or politics. Or Mac vs. PC.

This thread has clarified something for me: some people seem to treat RPGs as a belief system. It makes a certain amount of sense, given that it takes place largely in your head.

 

[Raven Crowking]

No, I don't believe that.

Good!

(You should not really have to explain why.)





EDIT: Really, it was just supposed to be an extreme example to demonstrate the problems with the "you must accept what I say my experience is without subjecting it to critical thinking" meme.

Also, I have (sadly, I know) wanted to find an excuse to say Gygax's ghost aged me 10 years for a pathetically long time now.

 

[Diamond Cross]

"you must accept what I say my experience is without subjecting it to critical thinking"

Well, critical thinking and logic does ignore people's personal experiences and it's all about the argument, and nothing else. There are people who do place an enormous amount of value on logic and critical thinking and end up using it to justify the same thing. So, at least for me, there is no real difference. Logic is simply the beginning of wisdom. And using logic and critical thinking does not automatically make a person more intelligent either.

 

[Jeff Wilder]

Well, critical thinking and logic does ignore people's personal experiences and it's all about the argument, and nothing else.

This could literally not be less true.

 

[ggroy]

Well, critical thinking and logic does ignore people's personal experiences and it's all about the argument, and nothing else.

Not everything can be deduced by pure logic and critical thinking.

This is the main reason scientific experiments are done extensively in many of the hard sciences and engineering.