I'm afraid that a resource like this will make internet debates even less
pleasant and productive than they already are.
To my experience, calling out an internet interlocutor for committing a formal
logic fallacy only serves the purpose of shutting down conversation.
After all, formal logic fallacies apply to formal logic statements- but
internet conversations are not carried out in the language of formal logic.
They are carried out in natural language (natural English, most often).
Therefore, formal logic rules do not apply. One might as well accuse an
interlocutor that they have miscalculated the gradient of their comment.
We comment on the internet. We say what we think makes sense in the way we
think it makes most sense to say it. We are not infallible logical machines
that calculate the truth or falsity of logical statements by rigorous
application of a set of rules of inference. We are not little lay philosophers
trained in formal logic, engaged in rigorous debate. We sound clueless and
pretentious when we try to sound as if we were.
We should learn to not take the name of logic in vain.
I disagree. Critical thinking using logic and sound reasoning should be taught and learned in an early age. Although it has been now discontinued, I had really liked in the past the specifications of the British AS/A Levels in Critical thinking.
> We say what we think makes sense in the way we think it makes most sense to say it. We are not infallible logical machines that calculate the truth or falsity of logical statements by rigorous application of a set of rules of inference.
Sure we aren't, but a mistake is a mistake, even if it's one that come from logic.
Wouldn't you correct me if I said that the sky is green? Why wouldn't you correct me if I made a formal logic error then? The funny thing is that unlike logic, my sentence could be actually true.
For sure there's ways to do it that's wrong, like doing it to feel superior, but it doesn't means that it's wrong to point out logical mistake altogether because of that.
I think fallacies should be taught earlier in life. When I learned them, I found out so many mistake I made regularly in my ways of thinking, and even from a quick glance of that website, I found many more of them that I clearly did from time to time.
It's okay to makes mistake, but the impact of the mistake I may have made in some case is certainly not okay.
Agreed that the formalism tends to be an appeal to authority or simply a way to appeal to a bias and shut down opposing views. I think more often than not, formal fallacies are misused and misapplied in informal debates, relying on over-generalizations and highly inferred arguments that can’t be supported by the literal facts of the debate and misread or outright mischaracterize the actual arguments. Often the person accusing another of a fallacy is in fact false and committing their own fallacy.
Maybe this could be useful resource to disprove and shut down attacks that misuse formal fallacies.
To my experience, calling out an internet interlocutor for committing a formal logic fallacy only serves the purpose of shutting down conversation.
After all, formal logic fallacies apply to formal logic statements- but internet conversations are not carried out in the language of formal logic. They are carried out in natural language (natural English, most often). Therefore, formal logic rules do not apply. One might as well accuse an interlocutor that they have miscalculated the gradient of their comment.
We comment on the internet. We say what we think makes sense in the way we think it makes most sense to say it. We are not infallible logical machines that calculate the truth or falsity of logical statements by rigorous application of a set of rules of inference. We are not little lay philosophers trained in formal logic, engaged in rigorous debate. We sound clueless and pretentious when we try to sound as if we were.
We should learn to not take the name of logic in vain.