On our own instance no less lmao

Inb4 YoU CaN jUsT bLOcK uSsSSs

  • Pippipartner@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    4 days ago

    Fallacy fallacy: only because it contains a fallacy (or a bunch) the argument isn’t necessarily void.

    Still stacking fallacies isn’t usually a sign of a good and or valid argument.

    • finley@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      4 days ago

      It wasn’t a fallacy fallacy. Their entire argument, nay, their entire identity, was based on a foundation of logical fallacies.

      And no, their argument was definitely not valid in any way.

      • Pippipartner@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        10
        ·
        4 days ago

        Moving the goalpost fallacy. You wrote in your comment to which I replied that no argument can be made against pointing out that someone’s arguments contains fallacies, which is not true.

        I wasn’t present as you got hurt arguing on the Internet so I couldn’t anticipate that you were up against someone who’s “entire identity was based on logical fallacies” (ad hominem).