Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: OrthodoxPresbyterian
"Huh? The "objection" I am referring to was to point out the logical fallacy in one of your replies. 130 posted on 2/27/02 9:32 PM Pacific by UberVernunft"

No, in your #94, you claimed that there was a Logical Fallacy in my following challenge:

Actually that is what I meant by "objection" in this statement. It doesn't matter if I specifically identified the fallacy or not. What I am point out is what I meant by the term "objection", which you seem to have misunderstood.

But it has worked. Do you really believe that foreign aid would still be taking place if it *didn't* work? It doesn't work perfectly but it still works. It sounds like you're criticizing specific implementations, but *not* the general policy.

C'mon, Uber, that's inane. That's like saying that Corporate subsidies would not exist if they "didn't work".

You identified nothing.

Which is irrelevant to what I meant by "objection" in the later statement. I identified a fallacy but I did not express it -- mainly because I knew it would bog down the debate.

Merely claiming Logical Fallacy in my response is without value. You must identify my Logical Fallacy.

The fallacy identified is an invalid analogy. The reason it is invalid is that there exists a large support staff of policy analysts that receive feedback based on decision making. There also experts and degrees in Foreign Policy Studies, *unlike* the case of Corporate subsidies. Based on these essential criteria the analogy you presented was invalid.

141 posted on 02/27/2002 9:12:08 PM PST by UberVernunft
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 132 | View Replies ]


To: UberVernunft, Demidog
I identified a fallacy but I did not express it -- mainly because I knew it would bog down the debate. The fallacy identified is an invalid analogy. The reason it is invalid is that there exists a large support staff of policy analysts that receive feedback based on decision making. There also experts and degrees in Foreign Policy Studies, *unlike* the case of Corporate subsidies. Based on these essential criteria the analogy you presented was invalid.

Okay, "Invalid Analogy". Now there's an actual identification of a logical fallacy -- if the analogy is, in fact, invalid.

No offense, it's about time. Shee-eesh.

Now, let's see if my Analogy was Invalid.

Based on these essential criteria the analogy you presented was invalid

Both essential criteria proven to be analogous. The analogy is therefore doubly valid.

Soooouu-eee!! Belly up to the Taxpayer trough; Pork of a different cut turns out to be... still Pork.

145 posted on 02/27/2002 9:38:04 PM PST by OrthodoxPresbyterian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 141 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson