The Fallacy Fallacy

[Contemporary Protestant]

I have a question about logic, according to the fallacy fallacy, it is illogical to assume that an illogical argument's conclusion is false based on its logical fallacy.


Wouldn't that make logic worthless? if it isn't 100% effective, whats the point, i find the room for error disturbing

https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/the-fallacy-fallacy

[PickelledEggs]

I have a question about logic, according to the fallacy fallacy, it is illogical to assume that an illogical argument's conclusion is false based on its logical fallacy.


Wouldn't that make logic worthless? if it isn't 100% effective, whats the point, i find the room for error disturbing

https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/the-fallacy-fallacy

Yeah that makes sense. Just because a claim is poorly argued or incorrectly argued, doesn't mean the claim is wrong, but it can still be passed off as a false claim if you can provide a proper argument against it.

But yes. Saying something is false solely based on a poorly argued/incorrectly argued claim would be a fallacy.

[Contemporary Protestant]

Doesn't that decrease the value of logic, since it isn't 100% effective?

Considering an illogical claim can be right and a logical one wrong

[the_antithesis]

Doesn't that decrease the value of logic, since it isn't 100% effective?

Considering an illogical claim can be right and a logical one wrong

No.

[SGOS]

Doesn't that decrease the value of logic, since it isn't 100% effective?

Only if you have unwarranted expectations of logic.  If the logic doesn't hold up, it only means your claim is illogical.  It is quite typical of theist thinking for things to be in black and white.  Theists demand that something be either right or wrong, and the reasoning involved in getting to the right or wrong be damned.  They don't want logic.  They don't want science.  They just want an answer.  Usually one that they like.  But reality is not that easy.  Skepticism is not accepting an unwarranted assertion without evidence.  It's not about being right or wrong.  It only tells you when you lack evidence to claim you are right.  The incredible simplicity and usefulness of that approach is lost on theists.

The fallacy fallacy itself appears to be a straw man fallacy, and is therefore a bogus argument.  It makes an assertion that logic never claimed, and then tears down logic by disputing the invented claim.

[PickelledEggs]

Doesn't that decrease the value of logic, since it isn't 100% effective?

Considering an illogical claim can be right and a logical one wrong

No. For instance. Lets say someone makes the claim that eating horse diarrhea is good for you because they "said so".

Even though that argument is incorrectly argued, you can still say the claim is wrong because everyone knows that eating horse shit will only put loads of viruses, bacteria, and other diseases and parasites.

See? I told you how the claim was wrong. It had nothing to do with how they argued it. An incorrect claim is an incorrect claim no matter how convincing it is.

[the_antithesis]

You just don't understand logic.

Stop trying.

[PickelledEggs]

You just don't understand logic.

Stop trying.

Who?

[Contemporary Protestant]

So you're saying that a good refutation of a claim lies in evidence, not in calling out logical fallacies?

[SGOS]

So you're saying that a good refutation of a claim lies in evidence, not in calling out logical fallacies?

Evidence against the claim is a good refutation.  Pointing out a logical fallacy points out that the claim is unwarranted.

[SGOS]

I'm sensing a theist here, who is sincerely trying to understand logic, but just like an alcoholic, cannot let go of the very thing that keeps him from thinking clearly.  It's like giving up an old friend who you dearly love, but a friend that still leads you astray.  Deep down, you can see he leads you astray, but you still can't let go.  But giving it up costs you nothing.  You can still believe anything you want, you just have to admit when there is no logic in it.

[Hydra009]

Doesn't that decrease the value of logic, since it isn't 100% effective?

Considering an illogical claim can be right and a logical one wrong

No.  Good logic (non-fallacious logic) cranks out a true conclusion from true premises and sound structure.  For example, Socrates is a man, all men are mortal, therefore Socrates is mortal.

Poor logic (fallacious logic) cranks out dubious - but not necessarily incorrect - conclusions from true premises but unsound structure.  For example, All birds have wings, insects have wings, therefore insects are birds.

[PickelledEggs]

So you're saying that a good refutation of a claim lies in evidence, not in calling out logical fallacies?

Any and every claim/refutation relies on evidence.

[Mister Agenda]

I have a question about logic, according to the fallacy fallacy, it is illogical to assume that an illogical argument's conclusion is false based on its logical fallacy.


Wouldn't that make logic worthless? if it isn't 100% effective, whats the point, i find the room for error disturbing

https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/the-fallacy-fallacy

If your argument contains a fallacy and your conclusion is correct, it's not because of your argument. More like a coincidence. A fallacy doesn't mean your conclusion is wrong, but it definitely means your argument is wrong.

[Mister Agenda]

So you're saying that a good refutation of a claim lies in evidence, not in calling out logical fallacies?

Sigh. No. A fallacy refutes the argument, full stop. If that argument is all that supports the claim, the claim is completely unsupported. The fallacy fallacy only applies to someone making the argument that, because the supporting argument contains a fallacy, the claim is false. The 'fallacy fallacy' is easily avoided. For example, 'your argument is fallacious so your conclusion is unsupported and I am justified in dismissing your claim on that basis'. There's nothing wrong with that response to a claim supported by a fallacious argument except, perhaps, lack of brevity. 'You haven't given a valid reason to think your claim is true' would be another approach.