|
|
"Your Logic Tutor" <ylt...@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:aM2dndWVo7tHnGvZnZ2dnUVZ_oCdnZ2d@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
> "Sean" <relaxing@earth> wrote in message news:44f51ef2@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> >> > > No one knows for certain.
>> >> >
>> >> > That is argument _ad ignorantiam_, logical fallacy for which theists
>> >> > are
>> >> > famous, as Copi explains:
>> >> >
>> >> Your logic aside,
>> >
>> > Why would you want to push logic aside so cavalierly? Critical thinking
>> > (logic) is how we determine if a particular argument is sound, right?
>> >
>> >> do you absolutely _know_ for an indisputable fact
>> >> that conscience is confined strictly to the corporeal mind?
>> >
>> > Are you trying to argue for consciousness without a brain because there
> is
>> > no proof that hypothesis is false? That's logical fallacy, Dan.
>> >
>>
>> the term "logical fallacy" is a fallacy, a misnomer.
>
> You are mistaken, logical fallacy is a well-defined term in logic.
>
> Definition:
>
> logical fallacy : a fallacy in logical argumentation
> wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn
>
I used to think that, now I see it differently. I don;t agree with
princeton, but only from a semantic pov. . ;-))
> Arguing for consciousness without a brain because there is no proof that
> hypothesis is false is logical fallacy, Sean, it is a fallacy in logical
> argumentation. See argument _ad ingorantiam_.
>
I disagree. You are looking at this from your own pov, knowledge and
expereince.
Your ad ignorantiam is the assumption there is not, and cannot be any proof.
You have no idea of other people's personal experiences and abilities to
connect the dots that you may not be aware even exist. You have no evidence
to judge anothers pov, only your own.
I never said anyone had to believe me either. Further more logical fallacies
[ see how I'm willing to switch to your terms ] are about argument and
debate. I wasn't, and am not in an argument. I expressed my different pov
based upon what I know & believe. It's called sharing, not arguing. <smile>
>
>
>
|
|