/r/badfallacy
A place for people who think they know more about logical fallacies than the average person to prove that this is the case. With links! And high-handed mockery!
A place for all True Scottish Strawredditors to laugh at reddit's collective inability to correctly identify fallacies.
Badcademics Association Member
Links
An explanation of why your bad ad hominem is bad.
Similar subs:
Guidelines:
Don't vote or comment in linked threads.
In light of Guideline NaN, use np.reddit.com when citing posts on reddit.
The reason for both the above is that when redditors get lots of downvotes, they often delete their posts and/or accounts, and this makes it more difficult for the rest of us to laugh at them.
Of course, no true redditor would indulge in such behaviour.
Additionally, it's probably best not to link to discussions you're currently involved in; it just looks petty. If someone wrongly accuses you of committing a fallacy, gently correct them and try and move back to the actual meat of the argument. If they persist in their ignorance, then you can submit it here.
Please don't show up here and start arguing, especially if you're going to start committing logical fallacies. Mod policy is to indiscriminately ban people who do so, or, as a warning, to give them embarrassing tags.
These guidelines may become actual rules in the event that we get enough traffic to try and sort the good stuff from the bad, instead of cravenly accepting any and all comers with approval and upvotes, which is current mod policy.
Other
Some advice about formatting links from /u/aedeos:
"appending the link with ?context=x, wherein x is the number of comments back you want to go from the one that you really want to show off helps a ton for this sort of thing."
/r/badfallacy
1,036 Subscribers
Noting something that somebody did is ad hominem.
02:57 UTC
How do you spot a Fallacy and then know what it is?
I just found this subreddit so this should be interesting!
Anyways, I've always had in interest in Logical Fallacies because I found them interesting and know that they're used ALL THE TIME, especially in places in Facebook, and in politics.
Another reason I'm asking this is because my friend and I are having an argument about how the iPhone X sucks horribly (I'll admit that I am an Android "fanboy" but at least I can defend that). His argument against Android is that Samsung has to team up with Epic Games to sell the Fortnite skin on their Note 8 (maybe 9?) because the phone is horrible. And then he claims that my only argument is that people hardly buy the phone for the Fortnite skin and that people don't do much with it, because Fortnite is so niche.
This whole situation doesn't seem right with me. He keeps coming back to the Fortnite scenario which kind of makes me think he's using a Strawman. Does anyone here have any enlightening words?
*I'm not asking for help with the argument, but I just want to see if he's use something bs*
Thank you! :)
00:51 UTC
"That has to be the neckbeardiest thing I've read." "Nice ad hom."
17:53 UTC
democracy = ad populem again
20:55 UTC
Appeal to authority= citing academic historians
12:35 UTC
Democracy, another form of "ad populem"
14:53 UTC
Ad hominem is calling me bad names
03:08 UTC
"Morality is an appeal to emotion fallacy, not science"
00:38 UTC
-1 is a fallacy
00:32 UTC
Redditor questions the credibility of a heavily edited video by someone with a proven track record of making false statements. Ad hominem!
22:16 UTC
Perhaps if I throw fancy fallacies at someone, they'll accept my point of view
14:47 UTC
Citing a Supreme Court case as legal precedent = appeal to authority
23:50 UTC
I made a kids story to explain Straw Man. I'll make more unless everyone hates the hell outa it.
15:29 UTC
[META] Which fallacy is abused on reddit the most often?
Some would say ad hominem, but on balance I would have to say correlation=/= causation. Whenever something bad is associated with something reddit likes, it's correlation does not imply causation, even when that is controlled for. Whereas a study of two teenagers and a donkey for teen stoner magazine is never shouted down with "correlation is not causation ackychyually".
20:12 UTC
An ad homphone argument
10:55 UTC
Comments just as good as the OP
06:01 UTC
A bad ad hominem in /r/london with a brilliant bonus
16:22 UTC
Terrible No True Scotsman shows up in /r/BadHistory
03:36 UTC
You said something mildly offensive that doesn't even appear to be directed at me? AD HOMINEM! Bonus: You used an analogy? STRAWMAN!
21:29 UTC
I don't know what I'm talking about? THAT'S ADHOMINUM!!!!
02:45 UTC
X is smart. Therefore we should listen to X's reasoning. Appeal to authority.
05:22 UTC
[All] Logical fallacies can occur in any application of logic. They're not called argument fallacies, after all.
19:25 UTC
appeal to authority. As in the authority that some think tank wrote a paper. They have no more qualifications to pass off their judgements as facts than some high school kid writing a paper about Jesus being real because the bible says so.
05:04 UTC
Directly quoting someone now constitutes a straw man.
18:59 UTC
"Whoever came up with the etymological fallacy did the ad populum fallacy"
00:33 UTC
This is what is known as a "Non Sequitur" Logical Fallacy. You don't get to jump from "all women are like that" to "sexism" in a debate
23:41 UTC
"Nice subtle ad hominem there too!" Bonus: link to wikipedia 'ad hominem' page.
03:58 UTC