To: mac_truck
"A fairly uncomplicated chain of logic that even you would have difficulty disagreeing with."
Not so.
Description of Ad Hominem Tu Quoque
This fallacy is committed when it is concluded that a person's claim is false because 1) it is inconsistent with something else a person has said or 2) what a person says is inconsistent with her actions. This type of "argument" has the following form:
Person A makes claim X.
Person B asserts that A's actions or past claims are inconsistent with the truth of claim X.
Therefore X is false.
The fact that a person makes inconsistent claims does not make any particular claim he makes false (although of any pair of inconsistent claims only one can be true - but both can be false). Also, the fact that a person's claims are not consistent with his actions might indicate that the person is a hypocrite but this does not prove his claims are false.
So, it would seem that Non continues to engage in boring, juvenile logical fallacy shtick, thus the name 'boy'.
To: PeaRidge
I'll defer to you and your friend H. Dumpty on this matter.
358 posted on
01/18/2004 1:26:06 PM PST by
mac_truck
(Aide toi et dieu l’aidera)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson