this post was submitted on 13 Dec 2023
124 points (97.7% liked)
Asklemmy
43791 readers
756 users here now
A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions
If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!
- Open-ended question
- Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
- Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
- Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
- An actual topic of discussion
Looking for support?
Looking for a community?
- Lemmyverse: community search
- sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
- !lemmy411@lemmy.ca: a community for finding communities
~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Being able to detect logical fallacies will help a lot, but it’s not a perfect solution either. If an argument follows a flawed logic, it might also have factual issues as well. The thing is, there are exceptions.
Some people actually have something factual to say, but they mess up the wording and end up saying something paradoxical. Someone trained in detecting logical fallacies might dismiss the argument as complete nonsense, even though the core of the argument was true.
Also, the reverse is true. If you know what you’re doing, you can craft a beautiful and logical argument that isn’t actually grounded in reality. Someone not trained to wield this sword, may be defenseless against it.
These kinds of arguing tools are definitely useful, but they don’t always lead to the right answer. Mistakes happen on both sides of the debate.