The 10 Commandments of Logic

Imgur ^ | August 25, 2014 | unknown

[beaversmom]

Good reminder for me and others.

[beaversmom]

If anyone has any real life examples of these to post, please do so.

[SES1066]

I’ll go along with that but don’t show it to the DU guys, you’ll be banned for life + 1,000 years! (Then again maybe that’s a good thing!)

[Parmy]

Ping

[MNDude]

“If anyone has any real life examples of these to post, please do so.”

The global warming arguments cover most of these.

[Lurker]

Post hoc: every morning my neighbor drives by my house and then the sun comes up. Therefore my neighbors driving causes the sun to rise.

[smokingfrog]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6JuJAEt8igQ

[TurboZamboni]

# 10.

“I paid into that program,therefore I’m entitled to whatever I get from it”.

[DannyTN]

1. You're probably posting this because you lost an argument. (Ad hominem)
2. You think if people just abided by these rules you'd win every argument (Straw man).
3. One or two logic rules is not going to convince most people (hasty Genereralization)
4. Not every argument is logical. (Begs the question)
5. People have been winning arguments without logic since the beginning of time. (Post Hoc/False cause)
6. The argument is either logical or not. (False dichotomy)
7. If you weren't stupid, you'd realize I was right. (Ad ignoratum)
8. Prove that this is the best way to argue (Burden of proof reversal)
9. Posting this is going to lead to a breakdown of civilized discourse. (Non sequitur)
10. All the cool kids ignore the logic (bandwagon fallacy)

[BitWielder1]

Thou shall not seek to prove or disprove an argument by taking it to absurd extremes.

"If your friend jumped off a cliff, would you jump too?"

[beaversmom]

Great list! :)

[JimSEA]

Excellent!! I’d add my mom’s favorite “appeal to authority”. “It’s true because I said so! End of argument.”

[beaversmom]

Can’t argue with mom. :)

[Shimmer1]

Oh yes, THANK YOU

[SpaceBar]

The single most important point regarding rational debate is that if one’s apponent is unwilling to concede a point if proven wrong by facts, then no further debate is possible.

[SpaceBar]

opponent... oops

[Shimmer1]

Oh no, now that one gets special allowance!!! LOL

[beaversmom]

The single most important point regarding rational debate is that if one’s apponent is unwilling to concede a point if proven wrong by facts, then no further debate is possible.

Reminds me of this quote:

"Exposure to true information does not matter any more. A person who is demoralized is unable to assess true information. The facts tell nothing to him. Even if I shower him with information with authentic proof, with documents, with pictures. Even if I take him by force to the Soviet Union and show him concentration camps, he will refuse to believe it until he is going to receive a kick in his fat bottom."--Yuri Bezmenov 1984, regarding communist propaganda in the United States and how to brainwash a nation

[DannyTN]

Actually, I think taking an argument to logical extremes is a very valid argument.

For example the Laffer curve was based on extremes. At 100% taxation government revemnue = $0. And at 0% taxation government revenue = $0. And somewhere in between those two extreme points is a curve known as the Laffer curve.

Another example. When I say raise the import tariffs to restore American industry, there’s usually some jerk that says “but that will help the unions”. And I always reply sarcastically with an extreme position, “then let’s offshore all American jobs and really teach those unions a lesson”.

[beaversmom]

This is a lady that might be an example of not being able to have a rational debate:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GQ87ehaZ-Ck