Why are facts called a 'smear?'

Post Reply New Topic

To be fair, ruveyn, you are correct, but only in a pure sense of logical thinking.

Conclusion is true IF the premise(s) is(are) true. The problem is that the vast majority of people out there understand logic as A + B = C, not TRUE + TRUE = TRUE.

All elephants are pink. (premise)

Nellie is an elephant. (premise)

Therefore, Nellie is pink. (conclusion)

Logically true, but the first premise is false by any measure of common sense. Now, if the premise is not subject to scrutiny, then you can easily send people to wrong conclusions by putting false premises into an argument.

Most "logic" arguments used to persuade people in daily life resort to intellectual dishonesty or human error in that the premises are incorrect or erroneously organized. The logic path is valid, but the premises are never scrutinized for accuracy. In these cases, the premises used to construct the argument are presented as fact, and they might be correct fact, but facts incorrectly organized easily results in false conclusions.

zero, what false premises were in the OP? That was just a listing of facts. They may not have been relevant to anything in particular, but you cannot claim that false premises were used.

If you're going to criticize Merle's "logic" (which is rather futile as she didn't actually make any point in this thraed) you might accuse her of the post hoc ergo propter hoc fallacy, assuming that she is implying that the incidents she listed in the OP somehow caused the shooting in Arizona.

Hypocrisy, thy name is Conservatism.

Do you remember 9/11? Do you remember a major Republican presidential candidate running an entire f*****g primary campaign based on 9/11? Going farther back, do you remember 9/11 being exploited for political gain in 2002 and 2004?

How the hell is bush a conservative?

I already have albiet in a different thread, right now the only person with any remote crediblity with left leaning political views is waltur. I don't see why any conservative member here should waste their time giving your exploitation of murder for political gain credibility it doesn't deserve.

You and other leftists have accused conservatives of being accessories to murder with absolutely no evidence, so don't even bother trying to claim you didn't or I will go back and quote you. I quite frankly am offended, very angry, and my anger is justified.

Inuyasha, you lying bastard. I have called you on this before.

That is a flat-out lie. I have called you out on this over here where you slandered me before. I am sick of your repeated false accusations.

You are a despicable human being with no sense of decency.

goosefraba, just go to the mods no need to rage.

Yeah his spending was out of control and he expanded the government big time.

@ Orwell: I think the War in Iraq is bullshit, but I don't blame the US for going after the people responsible for 9/11. Afghanistan is definitely justified. If someone at a bar swung at me, the next place he's gonna end up is on the floor.

Gotta love the chorus of "no true Scotsman" fallacies, as long as we're on the topic of logic.

Ace, you do realize that Reagan also expanded government and his spending was also out of control? By your absurd definitions, we haven't had a "conservative" in office since Herbert Hoover.

Also, I didn't bring up Iraq or Afghanistan, just the political profiteering on the part of Republican politicians off of 9/11.

Sure whatever...


That is a flat-out lie. I have called you out on this over here where you slandered me before. I am sick of your repeated false accusations.




http://www.wrongplanet.net/posts147762-start75.html

You were saying Orwell...

Last edited by Inuyasha on 12 Jan 2011, 3:03 pm, edited 1 time in total.

During the administration of "The Great Communicator" the thickness of the Federal Register doubled. RWR also failed to keep several promises (surprise surprise). He did not eliminate the Dept. of Education as a cabinet position.

ruveyn

Pointing out that Roeder was a right-winger is a false smear? How? That is completely unrelated to the Tucson shooting. I have never once claimed or insinuated that conservatives were "accessories to murder" in relation to the shooting of Representative Gifford.

You owe me an apology for your repeated slanderous accusations.

I was not addressing the OP. Just pointing out that people who think logic produces correct responses are likely seeing the process in it's idealistic setting. In reality, many logical arguments (that are valid as presented) are based on facts which would not pass muster if properly scrutinized, and most people don't take the step to properly investigate the validity of the premises being offered...they are presumed to be true when often they are not or misleading because facts improperly organized can yield false conclusions.

Quit moving the goal posts Orwell.

No goal post has moved. I have never accused anyone on the right of being "accessories to murder," and certainly not in relation to the shooting in Arizona.

You have lied about me, repeatedly, and you have been called out on it and proven wrong. The adult thing to do would be to apologize to the person you have slandered, and move on.