Disclaimer: not watched it all
Starting off with a false dichotomy, conflating that no one else is trying so you’re their only hope. Makes me want to sit down watch it and pick out any falacies, but let’s be honest, that’s not likely to happen.
Tell me you don’t understand fallacies without telling me you don’t understand fallacies I guess.
Starting off with a false dichotomy, conflating that no one else is trying so you’re their only hope
I’m sorry, but who else is trying?
Not /u/cyberspark
Doesn’t matter, the false dichotomy is our way is the right way because no one else is trying.
It’s a fallacy about creating a binary where there isn’t one. Anyone else can start up another initiative. He’s not the only option just because he’s the only one currently trying.
The fact that he has momentum does objectively make supporting his cause your best chance of seeing that goal come to fruition, until/unless there’s a fatal flaw.
Trying to fragment that support into multiple efforts just confuses shit and decreases the chances of success.
Best, not only.
Well your first statement is a subtle strawman. Ross said this way is the only way, because no one else is trying, not that it was the right way.
Secondly, fallacy fallacy, just because it’s a false dichotomy doesn’t mean it’s not also correct. Can anyone just start up another initiative now? Not technically, but practically. Or would any serious attempt just join this movement to add to the momentum. Then if this fails, when can another attempt be made, how long till the ‘political will’ burnt by this campaign is regenerated?
-
I apologise, I didn’t mean to insinuate that
-
I never said it was not correct.
-
