5 Logical Fallacies That Make You Wrong More Than You Think

Forums: Human Brain, Debate
Email this Topic • Print this Page

I loved this article. You can see every Internet discussion ever had in it. I especially liked "#4 Our Brains Don't Understand Probability".

Topic Stats
Top Replies
Link to this Topic

Type: Discussion • Score: 2 • Views: 2,001 • Replies: 6

No top replies

@engineer,

Quote:

If you throw a bunch of statistics at him about how unlikely that is (for example, that he lives in a low-crime suburb in Wisconsin where there's only been one murder in the last 40 years, that he's statistically more likely to accidentally do something stupid than ward off a criminal and that more people were struck by lightning last year than successfully shot bad guys in the middle of committing crimes), it won't change his mind. Instead, he'll rebut you by citing a news story or an anecdote about a guy who successfully fended off a Die Hard bad guy thanks to his trusty 12-gauge. For him, that single, vivid example completely overrides all talk of statistics or probability.

Read more: 5 Logical Fallacies That Make You Wrong More Than You Think | Cracked.com http://www.cracked.com/article_19468_5-logical-fallacies-that-make-you-wrong-more-than-you-think.html#ixzz1cUigsGbn

I think this writer lurks here at A2K

0 Replies

@engineer,

While somewhat interesting I can't get over the fact that this article is really not about logical fallacies (but then again, cracked is a low-brow site mostly about superficial lists and humor, maybe I'm being unfair to them), the author seems to think that "things that can make people argue badly" = logical fallacy.

1 Reply

@Robert Gentel,

He does misuse the term "logical fallacy."

But I think it's good enough for a general audience. "Cognitive biases" would probably run people off.

And Cracked has some interesting stuff; not necessarily medical journal stuff, but interesting to read.

1 Reply

@DrewDad,

I don't think the author did it to be accessible (most people don't know what logical fallacies are anyway, so it's not like it was a more accessible way to approach it) but because the author just found out about the term and has no idea what it really means.

The first thing in the list is just a recent theory (that we evolved to prefer to win arguments instead of find the truth) and really has very little to do with logical fallacies (of which there might have only been one legitimate one mentioned in the article).

Anyway, I'm not knocking cracked, I've run into plenty of articles there that I found humorous, which is clearly what they go for, instead of scholarship.

1 Reply

@Robert Gentel,

It was a letdown. But if the article had been about logical fallacies, i'd have taken much longer on it. A good easy read.

Robert Gentel wrote:

most people don't know what logical fallacies are anyway

Given the option, they'd rather not know what they are. That sounds pessimistic but it's really more fascinating. . . and pessimistic.

0 Replies

@engineer,

engineer wrote:

I loved this article. You can see every Internet discussion ever had in it.
I especially liked "#4 Our Brains Don't Understand Probability".

"#5. We're Not Programmed to Seek "Truth," We're Programmed to "Win" "

That is the difference between arguing and quarrelling.
Arguments shed lite whereas quarrels shed heat.

David

0 Replies

5 Logical Fallacies That Make You Wrong More Than You Think

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know