toad.social is one of the many independent Mastodon servers you can use to participate in the fediverse.
Mastodon server operated by David Troy, a tech pioneer and investigative journalist addressing threats to democracy. Thoughtful participation and discussion welcome.

Administered by:

Server stats:

218
active users

#fallacy

0 posts0 participants0 posts today
Replied in thread
@nemobis@mamot.fr

Since the #Israel's #genocide in #gaza I started using reductio ad Hitlerum but using Israel instead of the #Nazi.

Works like a charm:

1. the counter part can't call the #fallacy
2. bystanders absorb the idea that, in fact, what Israel is doing is just as shameful, inhuman and disgusting as what Germany did and (at least) its Government should undergo similar punishments.

I just wonder if we should also add a "reductio ad Israelum" page on #Wikipedia.

#SGU #TheSkepticsGuideToTheUniverse
The Skeptics Guide #1042 - Jun 28 2025

What's the Word: #Eco; News Items: #Vaccinating the World, How #Children vs #AI Acquire #Language, #Vera_Rubin_Observatory, Visible #Nova, Effects of Chat #GPT on the #Brain; Who's That #Noisy; Name That Logical #Fallacy; #Science or Fiction

Webseite der Episode: theskepticsguide.org/podcast/s

Mediendatei: traffic.libsyn.com/secure/skep

Replied to Nick Byrd, Ph.D.

@ByrdNick Fight one #fallacy with another. No economic statement can be proven by historical data. Only logic can do that. #Inequality is inevitable in a market economy, and wages, including the minimum wage, are determined by the marginal utility of the labor in question. Read more in Mises and Rothbard.
mises.org/library/book/man-eco

Mises InstituteMan, Economy, and State with Power and Market | Mises InstituteMurray N. Rothbard's great treatise Man, Economy, and State and its complementary text Power and Market, are here combined into a single edition as they were

"Humans are not perfect creatures and tend to distort the facts either intentionally or unintentionally. There are always the brightest minds who offer justice, but they are exception. So always be reserved of what others tell. It might be more fiction than fiction."

☆ Maria Karvouni Truth
The Impossible Proof Of Knowing Nothing

I just participated in the first W3C Authentic Web Mini Workshop¹ hosted by the Credible Web Community Group² (of which I’m a longtime member) and up front I noted that our very discussion itself needed to be careful about its own credibility, extra critical of any technologies discussed or assertions made, and initially identified two flaws to avoid on a meta level, having seen them occur many times in technical or standards discussions:

1. Politician’s Syllogism — "Something must be done about this problem. Here is something, let's do it!"

2. Solutions Looking For Problems — "I am interested in how tech X can solve problem Y"

After some back and forth and arguments in the Zoom chat, I observed participants questioning speakers of arguments rather than the arguments themselves, so I had to identify a third fallacy to avoid:

3. Ad Hominem — while obvious examples are name-calling (which is usually against codes of conduct), less obvious examples (witnessed in the meeting) include questioning a speaker’s education (or lack thereof) like what they have or have not read, or would benefit from reading.

I am blogging these here both as a reminder (should you choose to participate in such discussions), and as a resource to cite in future discussions.

We need to all develop expertise in recognizing these logical and methodological flaws & fallacies, and call them out when we see them, especially when used against others.

We need to promptly prune these flawed methods of discussion, so we can focus on actual productive, relevant, and yes, credible discussions.

#W3C #credweb #credibleWeb #authenticWeb #flaw #fallacy #fallacies #logicalFallacy #logicalFallacies


Glossary

Ad Hominem
  attacking an attribute of the person making an argument rather than the argument itself
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem

Politician's syllogism
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Politician%27s_syllogism

Solutions Looking For Problems (related: #solutionism, #solutioneering)
  Promoting a technology that either has not identified a real problem for it to solve, or actively pitching a specific technology to any problem that seems related. Wikipedia has no page on this but has two related pages:
  * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_the_instrument
  * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technological_fix
  Wikipedia does have an essay on this specific to Wikipedia:
  * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Solutions_looking_for_a_problem
  Stack Exchange has a thread on "solution in search of a problem":
  * https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/250320/a-word-that-means-a-solution-in-search-of-a-problem
  Forbes has an illustrative anecdote:  
  * https://www.forbes.com/sites/stephanieburns/2019/05/28/solution-looking-for-a-problem/


References

¹ https://www.w3.org/events/workshops/2025/authentic-web-workshop/
² https://credweb.org/ and https://www.w3.org/community/credibility/


Previously in 2019 I participated in #MisinfoCon:
* https://tantek.com/2019/296/t1/london-misinfocon-discuss-spectrum-recency
* https://tantek.com/2019/296/t2/misinfocon-roundtable-spectrums-misinformation

tantek.comI just participated in the first W3C Authentic Web Mini Workshop^1 hosted by the Credible Web Community Group^2 (of which I’m a longtime member) and up front I noted that our very discussion itself needed to be careful about its own credibility, extra critical of any technologies discussed or assertions made, and initially identified two flaws to avoid on a meta level, having seen them occur many times in technical or standards discussions: 1. Politician’s Syllogism — "Something must be done about this problem. Here is something, let's do it!" 2. Solutions Looking For Problems — "I am interested in how tech X can solve problem Y" After some back and forth and arguments in the Zoom chat, I observed participants questioning speakers of arguments rather than the arguments themselves, so I had to identify a third fallacy to avoid: 3. Ad Hominem — while obvious examples are name-calling (which is usually against codes of conduct), less obvious examples (witnessed in the meeting) include questioning a speaker’s education (or lack thereof) like what they have or have not read, or would benefit from reading. I am blogging these here both as a reminder (should you choose to participate in such discussions), and as a resource to cite in future discussions. We need to all develop expertise in recognizing these logical and methodological flaws & fallacies, and call them out when we see them, especially when used against others. We need to promptly prune these flawed methods of discussion, so we can focus on actual productive, relevant, and yes, credible discussions. #W3C #credweb #credibleWeb #authenticWeb #flaw #fallacy #fallacies #logicalFallacy #logicalFallacies Glossary Ad Hominem attacking an attribute of the person making an argument rather than the argument itself https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem Politician's syllogism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Politician%27s_syllogism Solutions Looking For Problems (related: #solutionism, #solutioneering) Promoting a technology that either has not identified a real problem for it to solve, or actively pitching a specific technology to any problem that seems related. Wikipedia has no page on this but has two related pages: * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_the_instrument * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technological_fix Wikipedia does have an essay on this specific to Wikipedia: * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Solutions_looking_for_a_problem Stack Exchange has a thread on "solution in search of a problem": * https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/250320/a-word-that-means-a-solution-in-search-of-a-problem Forbes has an illustrative anecdote: * https://www.forbes.com/sites/stephanieburns/2019/05/28/solution-looking-for-a-problem/ References ^1 https://www.w3.org/events/workshops/2025/authentic-web-workshop/ ^2 https://credweb.org/ and https://www.w3.org/community/credibility/ Previously in 2019 I participated @misinfocon.com #MisinfoCon: * https://tantek.com/2019/296/t1/london-misinfocon-discuss-spectrum-recency * https://tantek.com/2019/296/t2/misinfocon-roundtable-spectrums-misinformation - Tantek

"Common sense" is what you invoke when you cannot support your beliefs with either "real arguments" or "real data."

Common sense is the noise that comes out of you when all you've got is the vague sense that you must be right--somehow?--but even *you* don't know why you think that.

Common sense is a slogan for shutting down arguments without having to know or prove anything.

#ChayaRaichik and #JoelBerry are flaming heaps of human garbage who insist that #tolerance means tolerating their intolerance.

This is a #fallacy that ultimately means bigoted, destructive pieces of shit must be accepted and tolerated so they can spread their #hate free from #moderation. I hope the worst life has to offer lands on their doorstep every day they continue to plague this planet with their existence. Tolerate that.

#LibsOfTikTok #HateMongers #bigotry

lgbtqnation.com/2024/12/libsof

A marvellous video from the team @deutschewellerss which talks about the primary energy fallacy, and how replacing combustion with renewables results in a huge reduction in total energy requirements.

Every thermodynamics lecturer should include this in their lectures, especially giving students the challenge of thinking about what noun never gets mentioned in the entire discussion. #energy #transition #fallacy #climatechange youtube.com/watch?v=EVJkq4iu7b