If this forum continues for some time, then IMO it's only a question of time before we start having debates. If so, I respectfully request people debate honestly. The alternative is the cesspit we see everywhere else. This can be avoided if we know and understand the various fallacies employed in bad faith arguments. Let's put the bad debating practices prevalent elsewhere behind us and educate ourselves on the topic. Hopefully we can debate topics respectfully and honestly.
Here is a good starting point to educate yourself:
https://www.logicalfallacies.org/
The most common logical fallacy methods I see employed in debates elsewhere (which we want to avoid) are:
Ad hominem - attacking the messenger rather than the message e.g. "he would say that because he voted for....".
Analogies - your analogy does not trump a deeper analysis e.g. "but my Grandma smoked for 100 years".
Popular appeal - just because most people agree does not make it right e.g. "9 out of 10 dentists agree". What if the 10th dentist's name is Galileo?
Burden of proof - this sits with the person making the original claim, not the person rebutting it.
Circular reasoning - best to given an example, and this technique is very popular with a certain old hound on the old forum e.g. "Whatever is less dense than water will float, because such objects won't sink in water".
False dilemma - presenting only 2 options or choices when others may exist e.g. "cake or death?" Link (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PVH0gZO5lq0) for those who do not know the joke (NSFW).
Loaded questions - often dealt with by saying "I reject your premise", it involves setting the tone of the question to force a particular response e.g. "Yes or no....have you stopped smoking pot?".
Red Herring - introducing irrelevant points into the debate.
Strawman - you mis-state your opponents position and argue against that.
Te Quoque - to seek hypocritical statements in another's argument or behaviours rather than address the issue.
There are plenty more like the slippery slope, appeal to ignorance ("how can we know?"), proving after the fact, hidden qualifications, propositional fallacies etc.
Remember also that you cannot have a rational debate with someone who holds an irrational view. So ask yourself, is it worth the time and effort to actually engage in such debate? Also, a bad rebuttal does not disprove a bad claim - it just prolongs the debate.
Let's keep it above board and enjoyable!
Feel free to post additional logical fallacies and resources, but let's avoid posting real world examples for the sake of it.
Good post Ferg.
"So ask yourself, is it worth the time and effort to actually engage in such debate?"
Yes, indeed, a critical question to ask oneself. The answer is often along the lines of...
Don't wrestle with pigs. You both get filthy, end up exactly where you started and the pig kind of liked it ;D
Great post Ferg.
It has been over a year since this thread was created and I see we are starting to get more discussions on politics and the odd debate for some companies. Here is a chap who talks about the 6 most common logical fallacies found in a group environment which we want to avoid:
It's worth 9 minutes of your life (possibly 6 if you play on 1.5 speed).
Let's all get smarter every day and keep this place civil.
He is very easy on the ear and he held my attention....but what do I know given I eat pizza with a knife and fork!?
Smarter every day...good channel
Number 5 is interesting - especially on forums!
An issue with making a logical fallacy claim against another is not everyone wants to play by the rules or even understands fallacies. More often than not I have seen people argue for the sake of arguing and all they want is to win the argument, never mind how they got there! Also keep in mind you can't have a rational debate with someone who holds an irrational view. And much like the slow news day when journalists interview each other, once an argument becomes an argument about the argument...it is all rather pointless.
But if you want to call out what you think is a logical fallacy, then IMO it is best to explain why it is a logical fallacy than claiming an argument has more fallacies than a book on fallacies....which of itself can't be true. Instead help educate someone why they need a better argument.
I found this book rather handy to understand the subject better:
https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/112731.How_to_Win_Every_Argument