/sci/ - Science & Math

>>5356166
Yes of course. No matter how ignorant I may seem, any contradiction I make is in good humor. If you can't defend yourselves against my arguments, you'll never stand the test of real logic! At heart I realize perfectly well that my side of the argument is slowly dying, and you're correct, when push comes to shove I am on your side. I suppose generating these arguments is my way of contributing to expanding someone's thought, even my own sometimes.

Im going to college for computer science, so even though I don't follow the scientific method per-say (although everyone does in a way), I understand what it hopes to accomplish, and I appreciate it's hopes of keeping the scientific field relatively clean of these filthy arguments. It's not really my preference though, as I regard these psychological arguments as an art form! I think they should be appreciated. Politics is amazing, the logic behind some of the writing is able to describe things in a situation which can be infinitely true, while being infinitely false. Thinking about them all makes me happy!

Back to the list though, couldn't strictly adhering to the list be considered a logical fallacy? I mean, if you couldn't defend yourself from some of these arguments and have to adhere to a list, perhaps you should work on your argument? I know that if someone had to point out to me that calling someone Hitler was a logical fallacy, I'd be disappointed in myself.

but that's just me!