Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Raven Crowking" data-source="post: 5212570" data-attributes="member: 18280">No, the point is accurate regardless of the scale used. Demonstrating an absurd conclusion of logic is often used as a means of demonstating that the logic itself is in error even where the conclusion drawn is not absurd.This is because it is generally easier to notice the fault in logic when the scale is ramped up so that the conclusion is obviously wrong than it is notice the same when the conclusion falls within the realm of acceptable possibility.It should also be noted that demonstrating logic is faulty does not demonstrate that conclusion is faulty.&nbsp; I can say:Fish live in water.
Birds live in trees.
Therefore, a trout is a fish.Which is fallicious logic, but which comes to a correct conclusion.&nbsp; This, again, sometimes makes it difficult to see where the fault lies, as the conclusion is acceptable.RC</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Raven Crowking, post: 5212570, member: 18280"] No, the point is accurate regardless of the scale used. Demonstrating an absurd conclusion of logic is often used as a means of demonstating that the logic itself is in error even where the conclusion drawn is not absurd. This is because it is generally easier to notice the fault in logic when the scale is ramped up so that the conclusion is obviously wrong than it is notice the same when the conclusion falls within the realm of acceptable possibility. It should also be noted that demonstrating logic is faulty does not demonstrate that conclusion is faulty. I can say: [indent]Fish live in water. Birds live in trees. Therefore, a trout is a fish.[/indent] Which is fallicious logic, but which comes to a correct conclusion. This, again, sometimes makes it difficult to see where the fault lies, as the conclusion is acceptable. RC [/QUOTE]

Verification