Shin kicking by Gautam Bastian: A logical fallacy, please?
I have a lot of respect for Gautam Bastian for the simple reason that he does not use logical fallacies.
Why does Gautam Bastian not use logical fallacies? For the simple reason that they don't help in converting the infidels.
He says, "I don't think pointing them out is of any use to a discussion. It perhaps showcases the superior knowledge of the person pointing it out. That increase in 'welfare', is more than offset by the diversion into a discussion about the logical fallacies themselves." Boy! With such radical views on logical fallacies he could well be the author of this blog. May be he is.
But wait, he can't be, because in that post he also writes, "I try not to commit logical fallacies." Ah, come on, it is not possible to make an argument that does not commit logical fallacies, as I showed here. Bastian also says, "If you see me commiting logical fallacies, you are welcome to point them out, or to work through them, or to use some other rhetorical innovation. However I am not immune to being put-off by the first."
Okay, let's help him, and let's see if he is put off.
Let's take his post Another kick in the shin...
He is committing there the logical fallacy of argumentum ad misericordiam. Or simply, the fallacy of appealing to pity.
When one Cartellian commits a logical fallacy what does another Cartellian do? Usual backscratching, what else?
And when the backscratching is done, the link love has been made, what does the Logically Fallacious Cartellian do?
He commits it again!
(Link not via email from MadMan.)