I like this idea, and I’d like to see it developed further. I don’t see any reason why FGCAs shouldn’t be catalogued and learned alongside logical fallacies for the same reasons.
I guess the important distinction would be that certain FGCAs can be used non-fallaciously, and some of these seem to have valid use-cases, like pointing out confirmation bias and mind-projection fallacy. Others are fallacious in their fully-general form, but have valid uses in their non-fully-general forms, so it is important to distinguish these. (e.g. pointing out vagueness or that something is too complicated and has too many dependencies for a given argument to have much weight.)
Great post!
I apologize for mentioning this, but there were a lot of typos in this, which made it a bit hard to read. I want to link this to a few friends who are not LWers, but when I am not familiar with the source of something, typos make me question the credibility of the author (they also provide an easy excuse to discount things people don’t want to hear). I don’t want that to happen when I show people, so I figured I’d help you out if you feel like cleaning it up a bit. Here’s a quick list I put together for you:
Add comma after “But if (s)he is not aware of that”
Change “prone of” to “prone to”
“counter measures” should be “countermeasures”
“against which” should be “against whom” in ”...clever arguer against which”
Add comma after “humble stance”
Change “FCGA” to “FGCA” in first bullet of The List and in first sentence under headings of both Self-Sealing Belief and Preventative Action
The third bullet is empty and fourth bullet seems like it is supposed to contains sub-cases of the missing third bullet
Under Nihilism, “Live” should be “Life” and the “-” needs to be closed after “including arguments”
“I don’t like your opinion but I you are may have your own.”
“Yur” ⇒ “Your” after “Humans are different”
In “the thing you are arguing about has evolved and exists just because of that, not because it is true or a valid argument.” Just because of what? Evolution?
Opened paren but no contents or close-paren: ”...more likely and more stable (”
I like this idea, and I’d like to see it developed further. I don’t see any reason why FGCAs shouldn’t be catalogued and learned alongside logical fallacies for the same reasons.
I guess the important distinction would be that certain FGCAs can be used non-fallaciously, and some of these seem to have valid use-cases, like pointing out confirmation bias and mind-projection fallacy. Others are fallacious in their fully-general form, but have valid uses in their non-fully-general forms, so it is important to distinguish these. (e.g. pointing out vagueness or that something is too complicated and has too many dependencies for a given argument to have much weight.)
Great post!
I apologize for mentioning this, but there were a lot of typos in this, which made it a bit hard to read. I want to link this to a few friends who are not LWers, but when I am not familiar with the source of something, typos make me question the credibility of the author (they also provide an easy excuse to discount things people don’t want to hear). I don’t want that to happen when I show people, so I figured I’d help you out if you feel like cleaning it up a bit. Here’s a quick list I put together for you:
Add comma after “But if (s)he is not aware of that”
Change “prone of” to “prone to”
“counter measures” should be “countermeasures”
“against which” should be “against whom” in ”...clever arguer against which”
Add comma after “humble stance”
Change “FCGA” to “FGCA” in first bullet of The List and in first sentence under headings of both Self-Sealing Belief and Preventative Action
The third bullet is empty and fourth bullet seems like it is supposed to contains sub-cases of the missing third bullet
Under Nihilism, “Live” should be “Life” and the “-” needs to be closed after “including arguments”
“I don’t like your opinion but I you are may have your own.”
“Yur” ⇒ “Your” after “Humans are different”
In “the thing you are arguing about has evolved and exists just because of that, not because it is true or a valid argument.” Just because of what? Evolution?
Opened paren but no contents or close-paren: ”...more likely and more stable (”
Awesome. Thank you for the very actionable response.
Typos fixed.