| Author |
Topic:
[OT] Logical fallacy? [Locked] |
|
|
Date Posted:
4/7/12 12:53am
Subject:
[OT] Logical fallacy? |
Trying to figure out what type of logical fallacy fits "Why is killing wrong if we're not immortal? If we're not unkillable then don't blame us for killing."
The pattern is closer to indicating thought disorder such as asyndesis (entgleisen) than mere logical fallacy.
Joseph Paul Franklin doesn't make much sense and reading about him is fascinating until you actually read how he speaks.
-----signature-----
"Once more into the fray. Into the last good fight I’ll ever know. Live and die on this day. Live and die on this day."
- The Hunter's Poem
|
|
|
Date Posted:
4/7/12 12:53am
Subject:
[OT] Logical fallacy? |
First. 
-----signature-----
"Once more into the fray. Into the last good fight I’ll ever know. Live and die on this day. Live and die on this day."
- The Hunter's Poem
|
Balcor13  Posts: 568
Registered: 2003-9-10 20:07:48
|
Date Posted:
4/7/12 12:53am
Subject:
[OT] Logical fallacy? |
killing is wrong if you look at it purely on the basis of religious morals and ethics....if you're a deeply religious person who believes that you have no right to destroy something created by a higher being than killing is wrong
however if you look at it from a purely objective, logical and rational point of view where killing someone would improve society in some way than no it isn't bad
most people fall somewhere in that lovely gray middle area
ibtl btw
-----signature-----
Funny is funny...context and subject matter is irrelevent
-Helzer-
|
|
|
Date Posted:
4/7/12 12:53am
Subject:
[OT] Logical fallacy? |
Balcor13 posted:
killing is wrong if you look at it purely on the basis of religious morals and ethics....if you're a deeply religious person who believes that you have no right to destroy something created by a higher being than killing is wrong
however if you look at it from a purely objective, logical and rational point of view where killing someone would improve society in some way than no it isn't bad
most people fall somewhere in that lovely gray middle area
ibtl btw
It doesn't improve much for the people being killed, though.
-----signature-----
"Once more into the fray. Into the last good fight I’ll ever know. Live and die on this day. Live and die on this day."
- The Hunter's Poem
|
Balcor13 Posts: 568
Registered: 2003-9-10 20:07:48
|
Date Posted:
4/7/12 12:53am
Subject:
[OT] Logical fallacy? |
BuffsteriaCantBuff posted:
Balcor13 posted:
killing is wrong if you look at it purely on the basis of religious morals and ethics....if you're a deeply religious person who believes that you have no right to destroy something created by a higher being than killing is wrong
however if you look at it from a purely objective, logical and rational point of view where killing someone would improve society in some way than no it isn't bad
most people fall somewhere in that lovely gray middle area
ibtl btw
It doesn't improve much for the people being killed, though.
can't look at it from a singular perspective...but rather from the perspective of a society as a whole and what is best for society
that line of thought however leads into well who makes the decisions etc....which then can lead into a discussion of why don't we just live in a purely 100% perfect Marxist society (the best society/way of life on paper but 100% impractical on a large scale)
which then leads into a discussion of human nature and how by definition human nature doesn't allow the above to happen
-----signature-----
Funny is funny...context and subject matter is irrelevent
-Helzer-
|
|
|
Date Posted:
4/7/12 12:53am
Subject:
[OT] Logical fallacy? |
Balcor13 posted:
can't look at it from a singular perspective...but rather from the perspective of a society as a whole and what is best for society
that line of thought however leads into well who makes the decisions etc....which then can lead into a discussion of why don't we just live in a purely 100% perfect Marxist society (the best society/way of life on paper but 100% impractical on a large scale)
which then leads into a discussion of human nature and how by definition human nature doesn't allow the above to happen
The original question had more to do with whether or not the killer's rationalisation was a logical fallacy and what type...
But I think Objectivism is a better way of life than Marxism because it's more realistic a philosophy than Marxism, due to selfishness being a virtue of human nature.
-----signature-----
"Once more into the fray. Into the last good fight I’ll ever know. Live and die on this day. Live and die on this day."
- The Hunter's Poem
|
Balcor13 Posts: 568
Registered: 2003-9-10 20:07:48
|
Date Posted:
4/7/12 12:53am
Subject:
[OT] Logical fallacy? |
BuffsteriaCantBuff posted:
Balcor13 posted:
can't look at it from a singular perspective...but rather from the perspective of a society as a whole and what is best for society
that line of thought however leads into well who makes the decisions etc....which then can lead into a discussion of why don't we just live in a purely 100% perfect Marxist society (the best society/way of life on paper but 100% impractical on a large scale)
which then leads into a discussion of human nature and how by definition human nature doesn't allow the above to happen
The original question had more to do with whether or not the killer's rationalisation was a logical fallacy and what type...
But I think Objectivism is a better way of life than Marxism because it's more realistic a philosophy than Marxism, due to selfishness being a virtue of human nature.
i agree 100% pure perfect Marxism is great...it's also impossible
rationalizing killing someone purely is based on a case by case basis imo...killing Osama Bin Laden was ok...killing Rodney King Jr. was bad
-----signature-----
Funny is funny...context and subject matter is irrelevent
-Helzer-
|
Sezyrrith  Posts: 257
Registered: 2003-7-13 05:04:05
|
Date Posted:
4/7/12 12:53am
Subject:
[OT] Logical fallacy? |
BuffsteriaCantBuff posted:
Trying to figure out what type of logical fallacy fits "Why is killing wrong if we're not immortal? If we're not unkillable then don't blame us for killing."
The pattern is closer to indicating thought disorder such as asyndesis (entgleisen) than mere logical fallacy.
Joseph Paul Franklin doesn't make much sense and reading about him is fascinating until you actually read how he speaks.
At a glance, it looks like more than one fallacy. First thing that comes to mind is the complex question.
-----signature-----
E- 80% K- 60% S- 40% A- 20%
"That thing you burnt up isn't important to me. It's the fluid catalytic cracking unit. It made shoes for orphans. Nice job breaking it, hero."
http://tinyurl.com/Sezy-1
|
Zall_Trist Posts: 8
Registered: 2005-2-10 16:22:57
|
Date Posted:
4/7/12 12:53am
Subject:
[OT] Logical fallacy? |
The justification in the latter sentence suggests naturalistic fallacy, to me.
-----signature-----
Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge.
-
And here, poor fool with all my lore
I stand no wiser than before.
|
