Author Topic: What logical fallacies is he using?  (Read 6005 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline skidoo

  • Stopped Going Outside
  • *******
  • Posts: 5881
What logical fallacies is he using?
« Reply #15 on: March 19, 2007, 11:23:17 PM »
Quote from: "Joe Shmoe"
Quote from: "skidoo"
Most of his argument is an attack on a straw man: "If they waited for science to tell us why and how limes and lemons worked, how many more sailors would have died?"

It's not that critics of chiropractic don't understand enough about how it works. That's ridiculous. We don't think it works *at all*.

Then several more logical fallacies follow in quick succession, as others have already noted.

There's definitely a straw man in there, but the way you phrase it is more of an argument from final consequences.  i.e., if chiropractic is right and we ruin it because we're a bunch of cynical pricks how many more would suffer?

I see Paul's point, but I see what you're saying too. But I agree with the TB's argument (quoted above) that we shouldn't wait for understanding if we have data on efficacy and safety. I just think that argument is irrelevant, because us anti-chiro people don't take issue with it at all.

Offline Paul Ganssle

  • Objective Hitler
  • Frequent Poster
  • ******
  • Posts: 3615
What logical fallacies is he using?
« Reply #16 on: March 19, 2007, 11:26:55 PM »
Quote from: "skidoo"

I see Paul's point, but I see what you're saying too. But I agree with the TB's argument (quoted above) that we shouldn't wait for understanding if we have data on efficacy and safety. I just think that argument is irrelevant, because us anti-chiro people don't take issue with it at all.


Right, no need to wait for understanding.  Just establish that it works.
quot;if you looat the world and think there is a God nothin make sense but if you see it fro a naturalistivc perspectiove all the shti goin on is exactly what youd expect-"  -The Always Eloquent Richard Dawkins

 

personate-rain