Here's why the soft civil war will go hot...

P

Practical

Verified User
An association fallacy is an informal inductive fallacy of the hasty-generalization or red-herring type and which asserts, by irrelevant association and often by appeal to emotion, that qualities of one thing are inherently qualities of another.

It hit me in the shower, I mention that on the video. And I am sure that the most surprising part of this entire thing is the fact that I shower! This was a part II, we break em up so ease of watching. Please give it a look, deep down you know we are correct! Won't be long until they find their 'Lee Harvey Oswald', metaphorically. Then it's open season!

 
Yeah, no thanks. I'll never get the ten minutes back, and I may lose IQ points just listening to this crap. If you have something to say on a message board, POST IT.
 
Practical said:
An association fallacy is an informal inductive fallacy of the hasty-generalization or red-herring type and which asserts, by irrelevant association and often by appeal to emotion, that qualities of one thing are inherently qualities of another.

It hit me in the shower, I mention that on the video. And I am sure that the most surprising part of this entire thing is the fact that I shower! This was a part II, we break em up so ease of watching. Please give it a look, deep down you know we are correct! Won't be long until they find their 'Lee Harvey Oswald', metaphorically. Then it's open season!

Click to expand...

Word for word from Wikipedia. So you are dishonest to boot. Yawn.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Association_fallacy
 
Concart said:
Yeah, no thanks. I'll never get the ten minutes back, and I may lose IQ points just listening to this crap. If you have something to say on a message board, POST IT.
Click to expand...

Apologies sir. Might be worth a look tho, quality is pretty good! I will post the transcript next time instead of the video. Not trying to cause a ruckus, just a point of view.
 
Practical said:
Apologies for that as well. Just easier to copy and paste but I will hand type it next time. Never considered myself dishonest but if that is where the bar is now I will refrain going forward. Thank you for the tip, new to the forum and not sure how things roll here yet. No Wikipedia, duly noted.
Click to expand...

No plagiarism. Really? You have to be new to a forum not to know that you shouldn't plagiarize?
 
Practical said:
An association fallacy is an informal inductive fallacy of the hasty-generalization or red-herring type and which asserts, by irrelevant association and often by appeal to emotion, that qualities of one thing are inherently qualities of another.

It hit me in the shower, I mention that on the video. And I am sure that the most surprising part of this entire thing is the fact that I shower! This was a part II, we break em up so ease of watching. Please give it a look, deep down you know we are correct! Won't be long until they find their 'Lee Harvey Oswald', metaphorically. Then it's open season!

Click to expand...

I hope it doesn't go that far, but it sure looks like it will. War is horrible. I do not want it, but it seems liberals may force it upon people anyway.
If it comes to that, God help us all.
 
Practical said:
Apologies sir. Might be worth a look tho, quality is pretty good! I will post the transcript next time instead of the video. Not trying to cause a ruckus, just a point of view.
Click to expand...

You don't need to apologize. Your use of the association fallacy is correct. Presenting the video is perfectly acceptable. It is not possible to satisfy Concart. He is offended by the least of things.
 
Concart said:
Yeah, no thanks. I'll never get the ten minutes back, and I may lose IQ points just listening to this crap. If you have something to say on a message board, POST IT.
Click to expand...

Exactly, always found it amusing how someone will find a podcast from an obscure nobody that agrees with their point of view and pass it on as if it is authoritative, my barber has umpteen views on nearly everything, that doesn’t mean I find him informative
 
Practical said:
Apologies sir. Might be worth a look tho, quality is pretty good! I will post the transcript next time instead of the video. Not trying to cause a ruckus, just a point of view.
Click to expand...

No worries. Lots of people like conspiracy theories. They can be entertaining. My advice to everyone worried about a fascist government, a civil war or any destabilization of the US government is to buy a gun and learn how to use it.

d6bf936d1dae9be8fcc18b527b658bca.jpg
 
Practical said:
Apologies for that as well. Just easier to copy and paste but I will hand type it next time. Never considered myself dishonest but if that is where the bar is now I will refrain going forward. Thank you for the tip, new to the forum and not sure how things roll here yet. No Wikipedia, duly noted.
Click to expand...

Again, no need to apologize. Your use of the association fallacy is correct. Presenting the video is quite acceptable. 10 minutes is not a bad length for a video either. Your summary made it clear what the video is describing. That's a perfectly acceptable way of doing it.

While Wikipedia is a lousy reference source due to their bias, inaccuracies, incomplete articles and oftentimes just downright wrong information, your use of the association fallacy is correct. It does not matter where you got the information. Concart is attempting a bulverism fallacy.

You say you are new here. Welcome! This forum is only lightly moderated, using a specific set of guidelines designed to restrict illegal use of copyrighted material or sexual content. Enjoy yourself here! This IS a political forum, and people often get easily ticked off here. Meh. That's politics!
 
archives said:
Exactly, always found it amusing how someone will find a podcast from an obscure nobody that agrees with their point of view and pass it on as if it is authoritative, my barber has umpteen views on nearly everything, that doesn’t mean I find him informative
Click to expand...

Bulverism fallacy. The argument is valid, regardless of its source. It is a fallacy to attack the source of an argument, rather than the argument itself.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top