Going Rogue Complete Ed. on Sale on Steam 7/15 Only. $10.
By
Adeon Hawkwood,
Posted on: 2011-07-15 10:18 in CoH and CoV General Discussions
Quote:
People often make comments in threads that are not relevant to the topic at hand. That doesn't make them a fallacy. It merely makes them a comment by the poster.|
Originally Posted by reiella
So you simply mentioned that your friends remove malware for no reason relevant to the topic at hand. Which would be more of a red herring fallacy, I will concede.
|
People trying to misinterpret and twist what others say into being something else is the only fallacy being exercised here.
If the game spit out 20 dollar bills people would complain that they weren't sequentially numbered. If they were sequentially numbered people would complain that they weren't random enough.
Black Pebble is my new hero.
Quote:
Haha, no I'm wrong, they're both equally funny aspects.
|
Originally Posted by Texas Justice
It isn't clear if you think reiella is female or if you think I'm female. If you are trying to claim I'm female, then you've made another incorrect conclusion.
If you are refering to me, I've not done any back-pedalling. I've stuck to exactly what I said and what I meant. People incorrectly assuming I'm saying something I didn't say isn't me back-pedalling. It's them making an incorrect assumption. |
Quote:
Actually, it does make it a logical fallacy. Most of time, especially on boards, folks don't really realize or even care when they are used. Vast majority of time they don't actually amount to any sort of point being drawn. However, they can, especially when you use loaded remarks. I don't think further examples will really serve any point beyond approaching to inflammatory examples to get through why the framing of the statements is a logical fallacy, so *shrug*.|
Originally Posted by Texas Justice
People often make comments in threads that are not relevant to the topic at hand. That doesn't make them a fallacy. It merely makes them a comment by the poster.
People trying to misinterpret and twist what others say into being something else is the only fallacy being exercised here. |
If you really don't get why it's a logical fallacy though, I'd suggest really a better source than message boards if you really want to get it.
And yes, this is a bit of an ad-hominem attack [interestingly enough, most of the time you call someone out for using logical fallacies, it's a logical fallacy in itself, especially on message boards as opposed to more structured discourse].
[edit / add]
Well, let's be fair, even in structure discourse, you don't call other people out for using logical fallacies, it's up to the audience to make that judgment.
Let's Dance!
When more than one person misinterprets what one's written in the exact same manner, it's not reading comprehension that's at fault...the writing is not conveying one's intent effectively.
Furio--Lvl 50+3 Fire/Fire/Fire Blaster, Virtue
Megadeth--Lvl 50+3 Necro/DM/Soul MM, Virtue
Veriandros--Lvl 50+3 Crab Soldier, Virtue
"So come and get me! I'll be waiting for ye, with a whiff of the old brimstone. I'm a grim bloody fable, with an unhappy bloody end!" Demoman, TF2
Nope. It's simply me making two observations about people I know and others putting their own misinterpretation of my intent on those observations.
I'll stand by what I've said all along, you've misinterpreted my post to be saying something that it isn't saying.
If the game spit out 20 dollar bills people would complain that they weren't sequentially numbered. If they were sequentially numbered people would complain that they weren't random enough.
Black Pebble is my new hero.
Quote:
A fair statement. But let's look at what happened. Someone incorrectly interpreted my comments to be saying that Steam is the source of the malware some people had removed, something I never said. I challenged that person to show me where I had said that the malware they had removed came from Steam.|
Originally Posted by Furio
When more than one person misinterprets what one's written in the exact same manner, it's not reading comprehension that's at fault...the writing is not conveying one's intent effectively.
|
At that point, someone else joined the conversation and started their ad hominem attacks (reiella's own words, not mine) on what I'd said.
I've merely repeated my supposition, that one shouldn't read any words into what I've said except for the words I've said. Had I intended to say that I believe that Steam is a source of malware, I'd have said it in those words. Those weren't my words. The fact that 2 people misinterpreted it to mean that is due to them trying to read something into the posts that simply isn't there.
EDIT: As an example, the devs have made comments that have been misinterpreted by more than one person to mean something different for years. Power Customization is one example. Some read a comment about the difficulty of doing Power Customization and misinterpreted it to mean that the devs said it couldn't be done. Others misinterpreted it to mean that the devs said it would never be done. And they continued to spread those misinterpretations. Some understood it to be saying exactly what it said. That didn't mean that the writing didn't convey the intent of the poster effectively, only that some people put their own incorrect interpretation on it.
If the game spit out 20 dollar bills people would complain that they weren't sequentially numbered. If they were sequentially numbered people would complain that they weren't random enough.
Black Pebble is my new hero.
Quote:
I'd contest you started ad hominem before I did to be fair, when you 'observed' that people's reading comprehension was lacking.|
Originally Posted by Texas Justice
A fair statement. But let's look at what happened. Someone incorrectly interpreted my comments to be saying that Steam is the source of the malware some people had removed, something I never said. I challenged that person to show me where I had said that the malware they had removed came from Steam.
At that point, someone else joined the conversation and started their ad hominem attacks (reiella's own words, not mine) on what I'd said. I've merely repeated my supposition, that one shouldn't read any words into what I've said except for the words I've said. Had I intended to say that I believe that Steam is a source of malware, I'd have said it in those words. Those weren't my words. The fact that 2 people misinterpreted it to mean that is due to them trying to read something into the posts that simply isn't there. |
As a sidenote, please show me where I said that you believed Steam was a source of malware.
Let's Dance!
Once again, you are reading something into my words that isn't what I said.
I've never said that you said that I believed Steam was a source of malware, that was g_masque's misinterpretation of what I said.
I challenged g_masque to show me where I'd said that the malware had come from Steam.
That was when you joined the conversation with this statement:
Quote:
My comment about reading comprehension was in response to your post. So your post was the first of the ad-hominem attacks. To quote from Wikipedia:|
No, you instead used a logical fallacy to associate Steam with technicians having to remove really nasty malware. Your remark about the several people you know who refuse to install Steam being computer technicians who through the course of their job, had to remove malware from computer is irrelevant. |
Quote:
|
An ad hominem (Latin: "to the man"), short for argumentum ad hominem, is an attempt to link the truth of a claim to a negative characteristic or belief of the person advocating it.[1] The ad hominem is normally described as a logical fallacy,[2][3][4] but it is not always fallacious; in some instances, questions of personal conduct, character, motives, etc., are legitimate and relevant to the issue. |
If the game spit out 20 dollar bills people would complain that they weren't sequentially numbered. If they were sequentially numbered people would complain that they weren't random enough.
Black Pebble is my new hero.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Texas Justice
Once again, you are reading something into my words that isn't what I said.
I've never said that you said that I believed Steam was a source of malware, that was g_masque's misinterpretation of what I said. |
Quote:
| Well. Even if you force two separate sentences and thoughts into one sentence, it doesn't make it say that I'm calling Steam malware. You would really have to twist my wording to make it say that. |
Quote:
|
I challenged g_masque to show me where I'd said that the malware had come from Steam. That was when you joined the conversation with this statement: My comment about reading comprehension was in response to your post. So your post was the first of the ad-hominem attacks. To quote from Wikipedia: Again, I'll ask that you not twist my words to fit your own misinterpretation or put words in my mouth. |
Let's Dance!
Quote:
I'll agree that for someone that has already interpreted one post incorrectly, that sentence could be interpreted in the manner you state. I could have worded it differently. Since you had started arguing my challenge to show where I had said that Steam was the source of the malware, I merely pointed out that combining two sentences into one still doesn't say that I'm calling Steam malware. |
Originally Posted by reiella
Flat out directly stating that I'm trying to make your words say that you're calling Steam malware. If the implication wasn't that I was twisting your words to say Steam was malware, what was I trying to twist your words to say?
|
I'd guess that could be interpreted as me claiming you said that I had called Steam malware. It could also be interpreted as me saying that combining two sentences doesn't prove that I said something different.
It could go either way.
/shrug
If the game spit out 20 dollar bills people would complain that they weren't sequentially numbered. If they were sequentially numbered people would complain that they weren't random enough.
Black Pebble is my new hero.
Quote:
My initial response was simply observing a logical fallacy. It may well have not been intentional. I will say I doubted that it was unintentional because it seems really odd to be me to just randomly talk about your friends removing malware, but *shrug*. The misinterpretation from occurred because of that fallacy, which is why they need to be avoided especially if it's not intentional. If they are intentional, then the audience needs to be aware so they can critically think about the discussion at hand. People trend towards logical fallacies, we like them, we are inclined heavily towards bias, which is why it's important to be aware of them.|
Originally Posted by Texas Justice
I'll agree that for someone that has already interpreted one post incorrectly, that sentence could be interpreted in the manner you state. I could have worded it differently. Since you had started arguing my challenge to show where I had said that Steam was the source of the malware, I merely pointed out that combining two sentences into one still doesn't say that I'm calling Steam malware.
I'd guess that could be interpreted as me claiming you said that I had called Steam malware. It could also be interpreted as me saying that combining two sentences doesn't prove that I said something different. It could go either way. /shrug |
I'm at a bit of a lose as to your issue with the combined sentence. It was mostly an exercise to show how those two observations were made in the same context/breadth. It didn't really change the sentence to mean what 'Steam is malware', all it was intended to do was attempt to showcase why those two observations may be seen as related.
Let's Dance!
I like this thread. People are so stupid.
(NOTE: Part of the same line but you cannot think they're linked!!!! They are completely different and unrelated to this thread!!!!!)
Quote:
If I said:|
Originally Posted by Texas Justice
There are quite a few people I know that refuse to install the crapware Steam Client on their computers. Oddly, all are computer technicians that have had to remove some really nasty malware from multiple computers.
|
There are quite a few people I know that refuse to eat the fish eye salad at the Goldfish Emporium and Luncheonette. Oddly, all are Emergency Room technicians that have had to deal with some really nasty food poisoning incidents.
Would you want to eat the fish eye salad at the Goldfish Emporium and Luncheonette?
Anyway, I be Steam-less and intend to remain so.
Quote:
Well, that means I misinterpreted your initial response. You state that it was simply an observation, so I'll believe that. My interpretation was that you were agreeing with the other poster. |
Originally Posted by reiella
My initial response was simply observing a logical fallacy.
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by reiella
I'm at a bit of a lose as to your issue with the combined sentence. It was mostly an exercise to show how those two observations were made in the same context/breadth. It didn't really change the sentence to mean what 'Steam is malware', all it was intended to do was attempt to showcase why those two observations may be seen as related.
|
Quote:
|
Obviously they don't as they appear to be the only people anywhere, ever, that have malware spontaneously spring on to their systems due to Steam alone. |
If the game spit out 20 dollar bills people would complain that they weren't sequentially numbered. If they were sequentially numbered people would complain that they weren't random enough.
Black Pebble is my new hero.
Quote:
From the way you stated it? No, but that's likely due to the fact that I'm not a big fan of salad of any kind. I am very much a "meat-n-taters" man.|
Originally Posted by Flarstux
If I said:
There are quite a few people I know that refuse to eat the fish eye salad at the Goldfish Emporium and Luncheonette. Oddly, all are Emergency Room technicians that have had to deal with some really nasty food poisoning incidents. Would you want to eat the fish eye salad at the Goldfish Emporium and Luncheonette? Anyway, I be Steam-less and intend to remain so. |
Would I go around saying "Flarstux says the fish eye salad at the Goldfish Emporium and Luncheonette causes food poisoning"? Nope. Because that's not what you said. If I interpreted as you saying that, it would be a misinterpretation on my part.
If the game spit out 20 dollar bills people would complain that they weren't sequentially numbered. If they were sequentially numbered people would complain that they weren't random enough.
Black Pebble is my new hero.
Let's change that up a bit. Let's say that you had commented that quite a few people you know refuse to eat the Fred's Steak sandwich at Schaub's Meat Fish & Poultry. You then commented that all are Emergency Room technicians that have had to deal with some really nasty food poisoning attacks.
Would I want to eat the Fred's Steak Sandwich at Schaubs?
Sure. I love me some Fred's Steak Sandwiches.
But, I'd be asking others that frequent Schaub's if they'd heard anything similar or experienced any problems. I might be tempted to start checking the Health Departments inspection reports, especially if others had heard similar stories or had had problems. And if I found no confirmation I'd likely not think anything more about it.
In either case, I still wouldn't go around saying "Flarstux says that the Fred's Steak Sandwiches from Schaub's Meat Fish & Poulty causes food poisoning."
Why not? Because that's not what you said.
If the game spit out 20 dollar bills people would complain that they weren't sequentially numbered. If they were sequentially numbered people would complain that they weren't random enough.
Black Pebble is my new hero.
Quote:
It is however, very much the implication that many people will draw from a statement like that. Especially on the internet where I've noticed people seem more likely to read too much into statements (and just flat-out not get sarcasm).|
Originally Posted by Texas Justice
Why not? Because that's not what you said.
|
Personally my first thought when I hear someone say something like that is to ask if they're saying that people are actually getting food poisoning from Fred's Steak Sandwiches. Partly because a lot of people don't always get the possible implication behind their otherwise innocent remarks (most everyone seems to do it on occasion), and partly because I've known far too many people who like to insult and deride others without actually ever directly saying anything bad about them (something I'm most definitely not trying to imply you're doing).
MA Arcs: Yarmouth 1509 and 58812
Quote:
Sure. People may infer from reading those two sentences that the food poisoning was caused by Fred's Steak Sandwiches. But it would be a false inference.|
Originally Posted by Oliin
It is however, very much the implication that many people will draw from a statement like that. Especially on the internet where I've noticed people seem more likely to read too much into statements (and just flat-out not get sarcasm).
Personally my first thought when I hear someone say something like that is to ask if they're saying that people are actually getting food poisoning from Fred's Steak Sandwiches. Partly because a lot of people don't always get the possible implication behind their otherwise innocent remarks (most everyone seems to do it on occasion), and partly because I've known far too many people who like to insult and deride others without actually ever directly saying anything bad about them (something I'm most definitely not trying to imply you're doing). |
I don't think that way. I also don't talk that way.
You say that your first thought when you hear someone say something like that is to ask if they are saying that people are actually getting food poisoning from Fred's Steak sandwiches. That's a fairly reasonable reaction.
Let's take that one step farther. If the response you get from them is that they are NOT saying that, do you go on to argue with them bringing in all types of logical fallacy arguments or red herring fallacy arguments or any other arguments, even going so far as to use ad hominem to suggest that you are ill-educated for the discussion at hand?
Something to think about.
If the game spit out 20 dollar bills people would complain that they weren't sequentially numbered. If they were sequentially numbered people would complain that they weren't random enough.
Black Pebble is my new hero.
Quote:
Or, if when you explain to a person how what they are saying is actually a fallacy [even if it is not intended that way], you question their comprehension.
|
Originally Posted by Texas Justice
Sure. People may infer from reading those two sentences that the food poisoning was caused by Fred's Steak Sandwiches. But it would be a false inference.
I don't think that way. I also don't talk that way. You say that your first thought when you hear someone say something like that is to ask if they are saying that people are actually getting food poisoning from Fred's Steak sandwiches. That's a fairly reasonable reaction. Let's take that one step farther. If the response you get from them is that they are NOT saying that, do you go on to argue with them bringing in all types of logical fallacy arguments or red herring fallacy arguments or any other arguments, even going so far as to use ad hominem to suggest that you are ill-educated for the discussion at hand? Something to think about. |
Let's Dance!
Quote:
Except for the fact that your post was not the one I was responding to. Yours was just the last post before my comment about reading comprehension.|
Originally Posted by reiella
Or, if when you explain to a person how what they are saying is actually a fallacy [even if it is not intended that way], you question their comprehension.
|
The post just before yours was this one:
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Furio
You didn't explicitly...but the top quote from you *strongly* hints that you believe there's some connection between Steam and malware
|
If the game spit out 20 dollar bills people would complain that they weren't sequentially numbered. If they were sequentially numbered people would complain that they weren't random enough.
Black Pebble is my new hero.
Quote:
Really?|
Originally Posted by Texas Justice
Except for the fact that your post was not the one I was responding to. Yours was just the last post before my comment about reading comprehension.
The post just before yours was this one: |
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Texas Justice
My comment about reading comprehension was in response to your post. So your post was the first of the ad-hominem attacks. To quote from Wikipedia:
|
[ edit / add ]
Was it a typo? I've made a handful myself I know in this discussion
.
Let's Dance!
It was likely a typo on my part. Or it could be faulty memory. Trying to remember the exact causes for a response that happened 17 hours ago starts getting fuzzy.
I believe that my response was directed to Furio, as it was that post where the poster admitted I didn't state things explicitly but that it "*strongly* hints that I believe" ....
That is the reasoning for the bolded words below:
Quote:
Scrolling back to get the timeline I probably got names crossed of who I was responding to when since those posts were adjacent.|
People need to learn reading comprehension skills. Two separate sentences, two separate thought processes. People are trying to read things into my posts, again, that are not what I'm stating. The only thing that should ever be read into my posts that isn't explicitly stated is sarcasm. |
For making that mistake, I apologize.
If the game spit out 20 dollar bills people would complain that they weren't sequentially numbered. If they were sequentially numbered people would complain that they weren't random enough.
Black Pebble is my new hero.
Sometimes one thought brings up another thought. That doesn't mean that they can't be stated in the same post. It just mean that two separate thoughts were stated.
It also doesn't mean that the second observation is linked by anything more than the fact that it is discussing the same group of people.
Let's Dance!