A stickied list of logical fallacies probably wouldn't help... But maybe if we zoom out a bit, a stickied list of philosophical resources would probably be quite helpful. A link to logical fallacies could well be a part of that.

Cool. I was hoping to demonstrate how one might use a knowledge of fallacies by placing them into argumentative form rather than list form :).

We've got the resources section of the Learner centre. We could pin there maybe.

A stickied list of logical fallacies probably wouldn't help... But maybe if we zoom out a bit, a stickied list of philosophical resources would probably be quite helpful. A link to logical fallacies could well be a part of that. — fdrake

This actually sounds like a better idea! :ok:

I'm often using this as a resource and way of reminding some things that might slip my memory from time to time. Could maybe be part of such a resource material.
https://www.iep.utm.edu/

EDIT: saw that it already was part of it :smile:

@jamalrob @Baden @StreetlightX

If having a sticked resources thread is a good idea, advise we include:

Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, articles on pretty much everything by experts in the field, peer reviewed, citable, free.

Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy, articles on pretty much everything by experts in the field, peer reviewed, citable, free.

Brian Magee interviews, introductory videos to various fields and thinkers, always with an expert.

David Harvey's lectures on Marx's Capital Volume 1, expert in the field, pedagogical style, introductory, free.

UCL's introduction to philosophy resource, pedagogical and introductory, free.

Wikipedia's list of fallacies, free.

Rick Roderick's lectures on continental philosophy, series 'Self Under Siege' - Freud, Nietzsche, Derrida, Sartre, Heidegger, introductory and pedagogical, free.

Rick Roderick on the 'Postmodern Condition', Nietzsche, introductory and pedagogical, free.

Project Gutenberg, loads of free books.

Marxist internet library, free books/letters.

Invalid argument, true conclusion. (true premises as well.) — unenlightened

Right, so what is valid is what is contextual. An invalid argument is where the premises have no bearing on the truth value of the conclusion. In other words, the conclusion doesn't follow from the premises - a non-sequitur - a logical fallacy.

, whereas validity is a property of the argument itself." — Baden

Right, a logical property - where we verify whether or not the argument is a non sequitur.

We have a Resources section just for that sort of thing. A topic with resources on good argumentation and critical thinking would be right at home there.

I doubt anyone would read it so it’s a waste of space.

If you want to learn about logical fallacies, take an introductory course in logic, or do some reading. It's a good idea. — Metaphysician Undercover

How did @Janus word it? Ah, that's it: "egregious projection".

:shade:

Maybe have it in the already pinned post as an addition to what's already pinned there? — Christoffer

It's hopeless. The site staff will band together and keep coming up with reasons to reject it, no matter what you say. I should know better than most: I was one of them for a couple of years.

We're not going to overwhelm the guidelines with a list of fallacies and their explanations, but we could possibly put a link to a list of fallacies in there. Although that may be a compromise that pleases no-one. — Baden

Do it! That's better than nothing, at least.

:roll:

What about @fdrake's idea? My suggestion would be to combine the two. Pin a list of resources / fallacies in the Resources section and link from the guidelines.

If no-one reads in the Resources section, I guess they won't notice the waste of space either. :nerd:

Basic idea is OK by me if that's what people want. — Baden

Need I remind you that the British people wanted Brexit, which you strongly disagree with, a significant enough number of the American people wanted Trump, who you strongly disagree with, and that you take lots of actions here in your role as an administrator without deferring to what the people of this forum want?

Ok, I'll just wait 'til you work your way through every reply then... :ok:

Ok, I'll just wait 'til you work your way through every reply then... :ok: — Baden

Alright, alright! I'll catch up first, then reply to whatever you're referring to. :grin:

Cool. I'll try not to spoil the suspense by telling you jamalrob said no. :up:

Those who think philosophy turns on fallacies have yet to leave the play-pen. — StreetlightX

It's patronizing and overbearing and has a whiff of... Let's just say it has a whiff of Sapientia about it :razz: — SophistiCat

Yeah, let's read emotional things into it and name call and sling mud and make it personal. That kind of stuff is so much more reasonable.

Cool. I'll try not to spoil the suspense by telling you jamalrob said no. :up: — Baden

He also got in a few subtle digs, and acted as though he's superior. The irony is that he sees it in others, and disapproves, but apparently doesn't see it in himself. At least I'm self-aware. I'm even self-aware of the super duper irony this could be.

Or I'm misinterpreting what he said and making it all about me. Whatever, he has plausible deniability, the cunning fox. :lol:

Which is to say -- I don't think it would change our penchant for making mistakes in thinking to have a list pinned up. I think all it would accomplish would be to endorse the bad use of fallacies. So I voted no. — Moliere

It wouldn't endorse the bad use - at least not explicitly. That would be an unintended consequence, and I agree that it would be bad. That's why, of course, here of all places, there would be an emphasis on learning them, and learning how to correctly identify them, and learning how to do so appropriately.

We've got the resources section of the Learner centre. We could pin there maybe. — Baden

Yeah, let's pin it where it won't be seen by most people. Great idea.

I doubt anyone would read it so it’s a waste of space. — Michael

That you doubt that anyone would read it, and therefore think that it’s a waste of space, is countered by my lack of such doubt, which leads me to conclude otherwise.

Your doubt is countered by the fact that you're wrong.

What happened to the minimalism that was mentioned earlier? That's too much, and it's just kind of a needless replica of the resources section, and if it was hidden away from the front page, then it would undermine the whole point of increasing awareness.

Your doubt is countered by the fact that you're wrong. — Michael

I doubt that. :grin:

(I'm setting you up, here. Go ahead and say it).

Great idea. — S

At last, consensus. Just need @Michael's go ahead then. Oh...

Special pleading. False dilemma. ;)

Fallacy of trying to be wittier than me.