previous discussions:
https://www.warlight.net/Forum/224405-introduction-logic
https://www.warlight.net/Forum/224423-introduction-logic

a lot of people in this forum like to attempt to have debates about various topics, but don't have even a basic understanding of how logic works. it is my aim that this post will help them begin to form coherent arguments.

these are the four most common logical fallacies i see committed here:

strawman argument -- attacking an argument that was not made, rather than addressing the argument that was made.

ad hominem attack -- making a personal attack and pretending that is an argument, rather than addressing the argument that was made.

red herring -- bringing up something unrelated and irrelevant, rather than addressing the argument that was made.

genetic fallacy -- attacking the history of the person making the argument, rather than addressing the argument that was made.

notice anything these all have in common? in each case, the argument that was made was not addressed. if you wish to actually debate constructively and with some semblance of intelligence and coherence, you need to address the argument that was made. If you're not addressing the argument made, you're not even in the game. you're just babbling irrelevant bullshit and making a fool of yourself.

i was going to provide some examples but then I realized this forum is full of stubborn trolls who don't have even a basic grasp of logic, who will not heed or likely even be able to understand my advice, so they'll provide the examples for us. i'll identify fallacies in the thread as they are committed.

a couple hours is an unreasonable amount of time to hide a good faith, well intentioned, high effort post.

those who do not like my volume of threads should consider not downvoting them. when i have an active thread, i tend to stick to it. if you don't like it, don't open it. the alternative is that i have to create new ones when the old ones are hidden. nobody seems to like that.

Edited 12/19/2016 20:36:04

hmph you know who else created the same posts after the originals get downvoted?

https://www.warlight.net/Profile?p=9769323106

this lad.

>inb4 "red herring" and "ad hominem"

kill yourself

Wally Balls is a high elf puppet

>inb4 "red herring" and "ad hominem"

that was actually a genetic fallacy if in response to the OP.

if in response to my reply, it wasn't fallacious.

hi smegma, thanks for demonstrating an ad hominem attack. the first so far. you have attempted to dismiss my argument by attacking me personally. that is an invalid argument and you have yet to address what i said in any way.

You are a good troll, better than most ordinary forum trolls, i'll give you that.

hi smegma, thanks for demonstrating ...

What is it called again when you insult someone rather than attempting to get at their point?

To the point, what is your point in spamming the forum and circumventing the forum voting system? Is your point to get suspended?

Edited 12/19/2016 21:25:49

i wasn't aware that was against the rules.

only given a warning, that's pretty chill. thanks to whoever made that decision.

It's too late. You'll be put to jail

Yes, it was against the rule for you to only get a warning for spamming the site.

Warlight opposes the practice commonly referred to as "Spam." If You are reported and a claim of "Spam" is validated by Warlight against You, You will have Your Account either immediately TERMINATED or SUSPENDED, at the sole discretion of Warlight. Additionally, any winnings, if any, may be voided at the sole discretion of Warlight. Warlight defines "Spam" as (i) electronic mail messages addressed to a recipient with whom the initiator does not have an existing business or personal relationship or is not sent at the request of, or with the express consent of, the recipient, (ii) messages posted to forum and message boards that are off-topic (unrelated to the topic of discussion), cross-posted to unrelated newsgroups, or posted in excessive volume; or (iii) solicitations posted to chat rooms, or to groups or individuals via Internet relay chat, via the Warlight internal communication systems or "instant messaging" system.

What is it called again when you insult someone rather than attempting to get at their point?

Hi Poop, I see you lack even a basic understanding of logic. You've come to the right thread! That's not how an ad hominem attack works. Smegma never made an argument, he just made an ad hominem attack. I pointed this out, thus directly addressing what he had said. Hope that helps, you could certainly use some work forming coherent arguments.

Seriously? Major General Smedley Butler claimed you were a high elf puppet. Rather than address his argument that you are a puppet, you attacked him by changing his name to "Smegma"

And you are making offensive comments towards me by indicating that my name is "Poop" rather than Pooh.

Consider this a warning of offensive conduct towards other players. Learn to make an argument.

You shall be respectful to other players at all times.
Racial slurs, personal attacks, excessive profanity, or any other offensive language will not be tolerated.

Edited 12/19/2016 21:39:49

You don't need 3 threads about the same thing in one day.

If you post another thread about "an introduction to logic", I'll be tempted to report it as spam.

@DanWL, that is probably what he was referring to when he mentioned getting a warning for spam. I liked how brazen he is about creating additional threads because he's upset no one likes his posts and they all get downvoted.

Hi Poop, I've been calling you that for four years, whenever you follow me around harassing and insulting me. I'm not sure why you now claim that's 'offensive' -- perhaps you're trying to get me suspended? Good luck with that. Your credibility might be helped if you weren't so openly following me around harassing and insulting me. Everybody can see how biased and obsessed with me you are.

Anyway:

To directly address what you just said (take note of that), making a personal attack does not automatically make something an ad hominem attack. It's only an ad hominem attack if the personal attack is used instead of addressing what was said. If the argument is addressed and a personal attack is also made, that's not an ad hominem attack.

In the case of what Smegma said, I directly addressed what he said (just as I've directly addressed what you said) by telling him it was an ad hominem attack. So anything I said that you consider a personal attack, does not make it an ad hominem attack.

Hope that helps you understand some basic logic. I can see it's difficult for you.

Did you seriously just say you don't understand why calling someone "Poop" for 4 years straight isn't offensive?

Did you say that with a straight face?

If you post another thread about "an introduction to logic", I'll be tempted to report it as spam.

i was given a warning for that, so obviously wont create anymore.

it doesn't seem like spam to me because the threads are hidden so i only have one thread visible.

clearly an argument can be made otherwise.

Did you seriously just say

i'm saying that if you actually found it offensive, you would have said something about that in the previous four years.

now you're pretending to be offended to try and get me suspended.

good luck with that.