Atlantis Online
December 07, 2019, 04:59:58 am
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Remains of ancient civilisation discovered on the bottom of a lake
  Home Help Arcade Gallery Links Staff List Calendar Login Register  

New Poll: Restless Voters Prefer Democrats Again, But Still Hate Incumbents

Pages: [1]   Go Down
Author Topic: New Poll: Restless Voters Prefer Democrats Again, But Still Hate Incumbents  (Read 63 times)
Hero Member
Posts: 139

Eyes that saw...Ancient Past

« on: May 18, 2010, 10:08:11 am »

Try learning more...

Methods of Leveraging the Human Mind for Political or Academic Power and Control

Primary source: The Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy.

Informal fallacy is an error of reasoning or a method of hoodwinking an unknowing audience or group. It is often a method of verbal acrobatics to persuade audiences that through reasoning and argument an issue can be correct, when upon evaluation it is not correct but a lie.  This is a means of hyping an issue and spinning it as a truth. Still, it is a lie.

Genetic fallacy is a means of persuading individuals upon the goodness or badness of an issue by using something unrelated but similar by showing the goodness or badness of the issue. A genetic fallacy is often used with a personal attack and serves to reinforce a lie. It will be used to condemn a prior thesis by condemning the base source as the point where an issue goes wrong. The base source may not have any relationship to the end product.

Argumentum ad populum or argument to the crowd or people is a prime example of the statement that everybody is doing it. It is also a statement that is the appeal to the gallery for support of its contention. Some say this is not unlike the mob appeal. What goes wrong with this argument is when exaggeration of the crowd is hyped beyond its real scope. Mass enthusiasm via cheerleading can be a lie when evidence shows the impetus was created by coercion rather than genuine appeal. Many call this the bandwagon effect.

Argumentum ad misericordiam is a methodology used with heaps of pity and emotional blackmail for an apparent wrong done to persons when in essence the facts do not support a need for such high levels of compassion.  Using emotionalism to pressure an audience for a weak case is often called false witness for high benefit. Many times it is in reality a threat of becoming miserable or worse to force an issue. Some will even threaten suicide or in a laughing manner say something is to die for. It is an effort to position others as mean and wrong for creating miserable conditions for the one who is threatening.  Others may use this method to point up the plight of a constituency to leverage for a change in political behaviorůsuch as asking for tolerance when it already exists.

Fallacy of construction or composition of issues is a means of arguing from the make up of parts that have no relationship to the whole. But, by virtue of known parts the whole should follow.

Fallacy of division is the opposite of the above. It is arguing from the whole and its image to portraying the whole as the part when the part has no overall relationship to the results of the whole.

The fallacy of false cause also called post hoc, ergo propter hoc (after this, therefore because of this). The wrong in this argument is the weight given the causal condition. The quantification and formula may be coincidence and outside sources might cause the coincidence. At times, a third party is hidden and may be the ultimate source of the cause.

The fallacy of secundum quid or arguing from a general condition to a specific outcome or again it is also known as the fallacy of accidental relationships. It is also know as the argument of hasty generalizations where a specific condition is apparent.

Argumentum consensus gentium or the argument of all nations or sources for a point of agreement. This argument is typically utilized by the scientific community when they are presenting a theory about some topic. It is usually an assumption rather than a proven fact though many scientists support the concept. Everyone believes this statement therefore it must be true. Its best utilization is as a point of departure for a later proven fact.

Argumentum ad hominem or refutation of the man and what he/she stands for as a character issue in the arena of ideas.  This fallacy is usually used to defuse the character of an opponent and position them as less desirable than the attacker. This method is used to poison the well of an opponent with information that is usually fallacious. If he has been wrong in the past, he is sure to be wrong now. Positioning of dirty laundry in the arena of ideas. When attacked by the ad hominem methodology, many come back with the old What about your stance or tu quoquo. 
Report Spam   Logged

Pages: [1]   Go Up
Jump to:  

Powered by EzPortal
Bookmark this site! | Upgrade This Forum
SMF For Free - Create your own Forum
Powered by SMF | SMF © 2016, Simple Machines
Privacy Policy