@logic 101 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> So should it be illegal for my cousin to inherit
> an airloom [sic] antique pistol from my grandfather?
Logical fallacies, the Appeal to extremes.
> Should we dis-invent the gun?
REDUCTIO AD ABSURDUM (fallacy of the absurd).
> How about the US pull all our nuclear warheads and
> ship them into outter [sic] space?
> Would you feel safer then?
Logical fallacies of red herrings and false equivalencies. I can even throw in the appeal extreme measures and feel comfortable defending that decision.
>
> Maybe all cars should be manditorily {sic] retrofitted
> to have radar technology to detect if we are about
> to hit something?
> How about at owner's expense, or the owner is
> disallowed to drive their own car?
We are getting there and the mission is for safety. We also don't have groups fighting this natural evolution every step of the way, as the NRA fights.
>
> Should we ban swimming pools at private
> residences?
>
No, why? (are you comparing swimming pool deaths to gun deaths? You know those numbers were cooked, right?). The industry that represents pool manufacturers has done a lot for pool safety. The NRA, who represents gun manufacturers, has done little for gun safety, and actively tries to hamper research into gun safety.
> How about we ban glue?
fallacy of false equivalence.
No glue has a real needed purpose.
>
> I believe you would fail any class called logic
> 101.
Actually I aced the logic class in college. Can't you tell? Did you take a Logic class in college? It would have been under the philosophy department.
Which text did you use in your logic class?
We used one like this,
http://www.barnesandnoble.com/listing/2671917546554?r=1&kpid=2671917546554&cm_mmc=GooglePLA-_-TextBook_NotInStock_75Up-_-Q000000633-_-2671917546554but
but it was an earlier edition, not the 11th edition.
Memorizing the fallacies with their Latin title was a pain, but the rest of the curriculum was very valuable.
h