It's another episode of a Normie American Analytic Philosopher bringing up "logical fallacies"...

>it's another episode of a Normie American Analytic Philosopher bringing up "logical fallacies", "logic" and the "scientific method" and asking you to define words constantly so he can apply his own definition and claim that by detracting from the debate at hand and providing the "right definition" that he somehow successfully refuted the original point you raised when it was entirely unrelated and because his definition was more "right" you don't know what you're talking about whilst again completely ignoring the original point you raised

Who hurt you, user?

Americans should be gassed

Who came up with the "definition" meme? Isn't it clear there's no such thing?

It's not our fault Yuropoors are too buck-toothed and malnourished to define their terms correctly.

It was born out of Reddit-tier philosopher like Bertrand Russell. Unfortunately, Americans are too stupid to understand Wittgenstein so they parrot Reddit-Russell instead and continue on his dead philosophy.

...

>"So, why is the scientific method right?"
>shut the fuck up

It seems like you're so angry already that you could probably troll yourself, I don't see why you need to come to Veeky Forums to get angrier. Are you amping yourself for a shooting? Should I alert the authorities or your handler?

I mean, you don't deserve to be taken seriously if you don't understand basic logic

Logical fallacies are a meme that makes redditors feel smart.

>the rules of Logic are applicable to all instances of the use of language

Wanna know how I know you're a brainlet?

There the basis for rational thought

>rational thought

no thanks

no, "UR WRONG CUZ U CALLED ME A POOPIE HEAD ITS LE LOGICKAL PHALLUSY" is not the basis of rational thought.

What's worse:
1) People that use actual logical fallacies in arguments
2) People that call out "logical fallacies" (that actually aren't) without doing any actual arguing, in order to "win"

>buying into the fallacy meme

hearty kek, +1

haha the "all opinions are equally valid" meme end yourself my man

So, can anyone refute OP's point or will you all admit he was right?

No, that's wrong as well. Why do you enjoy thinking in dichotomies lol?

then what's the alternative? seems like your salty about getting btfo on reddit.

t. OP

i btfucked ur mom nerd

>then what's the alternative?

You are such a brainlet that you think you can form preset structures to all debates that will allow you to use le epic fallacy without realising that words are contextual and have a historicity to them that can't be reduced to mere singular definitions

You: I once skimmed the wikipedia article on Wittgenstein and it like blew my mind *hits blunt*

Not an argument, also, who is that?

i have noticed this. pseudo-intellectuals are fucking obsessed with definitions and semantics and never seem to grasp the actual points

Projection

His wiki, if printed, would probably be half as long as the Tractatus anyway

if you argued that a lot of so-called informal fallacies are just relatively week arguments that some author didn't like, you'd be right

Formal fallacies, non sequiturs and fallacies of relevance are never acceptable though.

However I don't know what you're even trying to argue. You really should read more about logic before you say dumb shit like this.

Literally all of these comics start with either "haha" or "heheh"

This is bait, right?