/lit/ - Literature

Who decided that logical fallacies were illogical?

>>18067561
Nope, I have simply been in these threads long enough to see actual people steal actual words, phrases and characters here. About a year ago there was an anon who was writing a short story about a duck hunt in England, which had a really clever metaphor to do with what the narrator did fighting in a past war. Anyway, the anon posted his work, he'd get pats on the back, constructive advice, a few naysayers but generally positive. Then another anon swoops in and shows actual proof that he cribbed that metaphor, copied some sentences exactly, and sent the plagiarised story to a literary journal where it was accepted.

On at LEAST 10 other occasions anons have confessed to stealing work in here.

I have never, ever posted my work in these threads and never will. Generally I use them to scare myself into writing, so I don't end up as one of the perpetually mediocre wishful-thinkers who post here, the sort of milquetoast pseuds who convince themselves thinking and talking about writing is the same as writing - or, worse yet, that the stilted drivel they fitfully produced over a 3-day 'inspiration' 5 weeks ago qualifies them, somehow, as the writer they long to be.

Is there a book on how to recognize logical fallacies in discussion?
And on debates, rhetoric etc.

>>10560776
It has been said that if you want to hunt an animal easily, take a look at the back of your hunting license and do everything that it says is illegal.

Start with this image. Developing points which specifically attempt to avoid all the fallacies will help you on the path to being a worthy debate partner.

Using it as a guide of what tactics to use to win arguments with fools, will function as the poacher's use of his hunting license.