A 3,000% Jump in Jobless Claims Has Devastated the US Job Market.

Results speak for themselves. Do these facts make you uncomfortable?

 

Why should California lower the wage gap? Ambition and educations should do that.

 

No the lack of solutions do. The CA economy compares favorably to states with lower taxes

 

Ask the guy complaining about it
@Doofenshmirtz ?

 

You are incorrect. CA has the highest poverty rate and a shrinking middle class. I posted facts showing the opposite of what you claim. Do you have anything to refute these facts?

He has a good point. Are unable to reply?

 

Why would I reply to a point you made?
The middle class should just get richer. Self reliance! Lots of rich people here, so it’s possible.

 

Lots of dodging, nothing to support your claim. Do you have anything to refute the facts I posted?

 

You said California dems haven’t fixed the inequality, professor asked why politicians should do it. Don’t put your nonsense at my feet. I’ve only said our state has a strong economy.

 

You should be discussing amongst yourselves...

 

Professor knows how to address me. Why do you continue to dodge what I posted? Do these facts make you uncomfortable?

 

I’m just agreeing with the professor. The question he asked of me that you won’t answer

 

A flu virus and a coronavirus are two completely different classifications of virus. Haven't you ever wondered why "they can't cure the common cold"? And yet, we have vaccines for various types of flu viruses. Calling this a flu is misleading, that's my point. The symptoms are similar, as I can attest to, having already had the virus.

 

Seriously? There are many like that on this forum today, so how can you tell?

 

So, ... getting back to the facts I posted. Do you have anything other than platitudes and dodges?

 

CA has the nighest income tax rates of all 50 states.

 

Yes it is.

Nope. I think you're trying to form a Denying the Antecedent Fallacy, but you're not even doing that. You're instead just listing a couple of Compositional Error fallacies.

The misunderstanding is yours, not mine. Inversion Fallacy.

I can't teach someone who doesn't want to be taught.

I understand them full well. You just don't want to learn.

Never said it was. I call out logical fallacies when I see people committing them. Calling them out is a direct counterargument to an argument provided, since an argument that contains a logical fallacy is invalid.

I've consistently been doing just that. Would you like me to teach you what a substantive argument is?

 

There is no one "flu virus". But yes, orthomyxoviruses and coronaviruses are different.

Because there are an insane amount of different viruses that can cause what we call "the common cold".

Yup, because there are many less strains of "flu". Even then, we can't vaccinate for all of them and we don't know which strains will be popular in any given year.

No it's not. It IS a flu. You seem to think that only orthomyxoviruses are "flu", but coronaviruses are "flu" as well. Coronaviruses can also be "common cold", as can rhinoviruses.

My reasoning is that the words "flu" and "common cold" simply refer to a particular set of symptoms rather than referring to any particular virus family.

... and that's my point from above. The word "flu" refers to a particular set of symptoms, of which you experienced. So, you experienced a "flu" (caused by a coronavirus), even though it wasn't the "common flu" (caused by an orthomyxovirus).

 

An inversion fallacy, or more commonly a fallacy of the inverse, IS denying the antecedent. It is just another name for it. My example is exactly that. Put in formal terms, if x then y. Therefore if not y then x. What you have done is invent a new fallacy that doesn't exist and then claimed people were guilty of committing that fallacy. If that is not the case, please provide a link which explains an inversion fallacy in any other way. Don't worry, I'll wait.

As I said, you are constantly committing the fallacy fallacy.

https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/the-fallacy-fallacy

Therefore, almost every accusation you make of fallacy, where no other argumentation is provided, is likely itself a fallacy.

You don't. You simply assert that everything that is said is a logical fallacy, even if you have to invent your own logical fallacies to do so, then offer no other reasoning or evidence. It isn't substantive at all and more importantly, it is mind-numbingly tedious.

 

No it isn't. They are different fallacies.

No it wasn't. You did not form an "if, then" argument. You just provided me with a couple of compositional errors, which is also a fallacy, but not the fallacies we are currently discussing.

WRONG. The logical form (using your chosen terms of x and y) for the Denying the Antecedent Fallacy are as follows:

If X, then Y.
NOT X.
Therefore, not Y.

An example of this fallacy would be as follows:

If I have a dog, then I have a pet.
I do not have a dog.
Therefore, I do not have a pet.

The issue with this line of reasoning (denying the antecedent) is that dogs are not the only pets in existence. I might have a cat, turtle, fish, etc. instead...

You have a lot to learn about logic. Maybe you'd learn a thing or two about logic if you would stop trying to teach people about it even though you don't have the knowledge to do so.

No, the fallacy exists. It is otherwise known as "projection". It occurs whenever one attempts to attribute what applies to oneself onto someone else. It is a specific form of the contextomy fallacy.

False Authority Fallacy. There is no "holy link" that is a "master list of logical fallacies". The proper authority is the axioms of logic themselves, not any "holy link".

WRONG. This is only one specific form of the fallacy fallacy, NOT the fallacy fallacy itself. A fallacy fallacy is actually quite literally an error of logic about errors of logic, as the word fallacy means "error of logic". One specific form of this is indeed, as that link describes, whenever one reasons that a conclusion is untrue simply because the argumentation contained a fallacy.

However, there are numerous other ways to commit an error of logic about an error of logic. You even did so just now, by accusing me of committing a fallacy that I did not actually commit.

See above. You still have lots to learn about logic and how it works.

I'll take that as a no, then...

 

What you wrote is the same as what I wrote. You simply copy and pasted from here

https://www.logicallyfallacious.com/logicalfallacies/Denying-the-Antecedent

All you've done is changed the location of the word therefore, but done nothing to change the logical progression what so ever. Again, mind-numbingly tedious.

So you can't find a single source on the entirety of the internet to support your assertion? I tried and I can't. You claim I have committed a false authority fallacy, yet I have searched google for any reference to an inversion fallacy being anything close to what you are describing. Quite simply, it doesn't exist. Again, you don't understand the fallacies you are talking about. A false authority fallacy involves claiming someone to be an authority who isn't actually an authority. So for example, it is entirely reasonable to appeal to authority when talking about quantum mechanics, as this is a topic which is outside the understanding of the overwhelming majority of people. However, if you quoted a person who had a PhD in the mystic sciences to support your assertion about quantum physics, you would have appealed to a false authority. The example in question, you would have been free to quote literally any source in the entire world. A professor of logic from the best university in the world, a website that lists fallacies, wikipedia (your favorite), literally anything would have sufficed. So the idea that this is an appeal to a false authority is idiotic nonsense.

You can't just assert that something is WRONG and because you put it in all caps, that magically makes it the case. You commit the fallacy fallacy constantly. You denying reality does nothing to change that.

 

I enjoy our discussions. Just pointing out that when faced with the results of your ideology, you backed down.

 

Or perhaps you don’t actually know my ideology

 

I only know what you post. You defended CAs economy and were presented with facts.

 

Huge Uemployment Shakes the Economy.

No S**t!

 

It’s one of the largest in the world. That’s indisputable.