"You commit the appeal to stone when you dismiss a claim as absurd without giving any reason or evidence. It can show up as "That's nonsense," "Be serious," or "That's obviously false." Often, people say these things because they don't want to engage in a debate. That's fine, and not necessarily a fallacy: We don't owe everyone who makes a claim a full discussion. But we shouldn't pretend these statements are rebuttals; they're just conversation enders."
"This fallacy also often appears as "You're being pedantic," "You're splitting hairs," or "You're arguing semantics." Sometimes a person does get stuck on irrelevant details; but at other times, those "hairs" are crucial details to address. For example, take this statement: "Plate tectonics is just a theory. I have my own theories." This is a logical fallacy called equivocation. Someone might reply, "In science, 'theory' means a well-supported explanation." If the first person brushes this off by saying, "Don't be pedantic," they've committed a second logical fallacy: the"
"Logical fallacies are flaws in reasoning. They are often called informal fallacies. It's becoming more common for people to call out these fallacies by name. You often hear accusations of people engaging in "ad hominem," "appeal to nature," and "straw man" thinking, for example. Some logical fallacies, however, are prevalent and yet rarely discussed. Here are three of them."
Logical fallacies are flaws in reasoning often categorized as informal fallacies. The appeal-to-stone fallacy dismisses a claim as absurd without evidence, using phrases like "That's nonsense" or "Be serious," which end conversation rather than rebut claims. Labeling someone as pedantic can itself be fallacious when the disputed details are important; equivocation over terms like "theory" in science illustrates this. The fallacy of composition treats a complex whole as merely the sum of its parts. The historian's fallacy judges past decisions unfairly by applying present knowledge and standards to earlier choices.
Read at Psychology Today
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]