In a previous post complaining about Tumblr, one of my major points was that Tumblr does not have a comment system. I am obligated to correct myself.
Tumblr has a few different comment systems, all of which are limited. As far as I'm aware, there are also questions, replies, and third party comment systems. Questions and replies are so constrained that I'm not sure they deserve to be called comment systems. But I did manage to install a third party comment system, Disqus. The comments work fine, though I don't like that there's no rss feed for me to track comments.
(BTW, I could also install Disqus on this blog, but I probably won't unless anyone gives me a compelling reason for it.)
However, I do not think this calls for a revision of my original conclusion; tumblr is still terrible. The fact of the matter is that most tumblrs do not bother with third party comment systems. Reblogging is still the main method of discussion.
Wednesday, May 30, 2012
Monday, May 28, 2012
Hypothetical fallacies
My boyfriend pointed out these two fallacies, and now I feel like I see them everywhere!
Argument from future majority: "In a few decades, everyone will look back and see how wrong you were."
Hidden assumptions: Will people in the future in fact see how wrong you were? Is the majority opinion relevant? Are future people's opinions necessarily better than present people's opinions?
Combines: appeal to future evidence and argument from majority
Argument from hypothetical hypocrisy: "If she were a Republican, the right-wing would be dismissing this scandal as a distraction."
Hidden assumptions: Would the right-wing in fact do that? Does that necessarily mean that the right-wing's current actions are wrong, or could it just mean that their hypothetical actions are wrong? Do hypothetical wrongs of the right-wing justify similar wrongs of the left-wing?
Combines: begging the question and tu quoque
The nature of these arguments is that even if all parties were to agree on the hypothetical, the conclusions are still fallacious.
Argument from future majority: "In a few decades, everyone will look back and see how wrong you were."
Hidden assumptions: Will people in the future in fact see how wrong you were? Is the majority opinion relevant? Are future people's opinions necessarily better than present people's opinions?
Combines: appeal to future evidence and argument from majority
Argument from hypothetical hypocrisy: "If she were a Republican, the right-wing would be dismissing this scandal as a distraction."
Hidden assumptions: Would the right-wing in fact do that? Does that necessarily mean that the right-wing's current actions are wrong, or could it just mean that their hypothetical actions are wrong? Do hypothetical wrongs of the right-wing justify similar wrongs of the left-wing?
Combines: begging the question and tu quoque
The nature of these arguments is that even if all parties were to agree on the hypothetical, the conclusions are still fallacious.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
