Timeline for You disagree with me, therefore you are X. What is the name of this fallacy (manipulative trick)?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
11 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 22, 2018 at 12:47 | vote | accept | rus9384 | ||
| Sep 22, 2018 at 12:28 | answer | added | Frank Hubeny | timeline score: 1 | |
| Sep 22, 2018 at 12:26 | history | edited | Frank Hubeny | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
grammar spelling
|
| Sep 21, 2018 at 21:45 | answer | added | Cort Ammon | timeline score: 0 | |
| Sep 21, 2018 at 20:31 | comment | added | rus9384 | @EliranH, hm, but according to relativity principle the Earth does not revolve around the Sun, it's just in most cases where you need to predict motions it is easier to use the Sun as starting body (guess this English is screwed, there is no equivalent in English). I would rather refer to flat-earthers. However, in this case it was harder to draw such an inference, as we were talking about consent. | |
| Sep 21, 2018 at 20:21 | comment | added | E... | Inferring something about someone only because of disagreement is not necessarily fallacious. If someone disagreed with you that the sun revolves around the earth you would certainly be justified in inferring that they are not rational. | |
| Sep 21, 2018 at 20:04 | comment | added | rus9384 | @Conifold, I thought it has a form of inference, just the word then is omitted after the comma. But No True Scotsman seems to imply that Scotsman in this case is the one who is adult or logical enough to have a conversation with. | |
| Sep 21, 2018 at 19:48 | comment | added | Conifold | Even a non-sequitur has to be an inference. If you want to force it into some kind of fallacy try No True Scotsman (would disagree with me on this). | |
| Sep 21, 2018 at 19:36 | comment | added | rus9384 | @Conifold, just non sequiturs? | |
| Sep 21, 2018 at 19:36 | comment | added | Conifold | The first part "presupposes" nothing because this is just a rhetorical outburst akin to "If you are buying this I have a bridge to sell you". Both are phrased as an inference but neither is one, they are just dismissals with a flowery exclamation point. | |
| Sep 21, 2018 at 19:27 | history | asked | rus9384 | CC BY-SA 4.0 |