Quote:
|
Originally Posted by JonnyBGood
"oh you're just saying it's a good idea to invest in that company because you own it". The premise-proposition-conclusion chain here goes thusly: premise: you own the company, proposition: because you own the company you want it to succeed, conclusion: because you want the company to succeed all statements from you praising, promoting or otherwise leading to an improvement of the value of the company are false. Here we can clearly see that while the premise is obvious, the proposition most likely correct, the conclusion is a logical fallacy because you're not actually saying anything about the statement.
|
Sure, it may be a logical fallacy in a neutral, fact-driven, all statements taking without context-world where every statement is built up from agreed-upon facts, but that doesn't fit very well with the reality. In reality, sources do matter, because it's a very, very easy way of discerning credibility. With the amount of information and stuff happening you're always forced to take things at facevalue, one way or another, and as such, a person praising a company being their CEO
is valid information that will affect their credibility.
I mean, if you were going to fact-check every bloody detail of everything ever you'd be pretty busy. Instead you take things at face-value, and a source not being credible is valuable information.
Along the same logic if a raging retard continuesly shows himself incapable of understanding reason, shows himself to be misinformed and naive on a variety of subjects you do know, you're probably going to be pretty fast at dismissing anything he says on subjects you don't know also. It may not be logically valid, but it's bloody usefull and saves time.