Sentences with phrase «fallacious because»

Therefore the entire argument is actually fallacious because it is based on a false assumption.

I am suggesting that the «estimate» is fallacious because economic growth over the past 250 years is inextricable from increases in freedom and civil liberties.

I am suggesting that the «estimate» is fallacious because economic growth over the past 250 years is inextricable from increases in freedom and civil liberties critically including the freedom to burn fossil fuels.

Joshua, You Wrote: I am suggesting that the «estimate» is fallacious because economic growth over the past 250 years is inextricable from increases in freedom and civil liberties.

This sort of «reasoning» is fallacious because merely changing the topic of discussion hardly counts as an argument against a claim.

But, then, any such theory is fallacious because it implicitly asserts that alternatives in respects other than those marked by the nonteleological principle are morally indifferent, and that assertion is a moral evaluation of the alternatives in those other respects.

Not exact matches

The argument is fallacious, we are told, because it is based upon the implicit, but false, assumption that

However, because people either fear guns or desperately want violent crimes to be reduced and see guns as their cause, they will still believe that gun control laws will actually protect them, as fallacious as that idea is.

To say there are «two entirely different Thomisms» because of the breadth of their applications is fallacious.

Those are what are known as fallacious arguments because they are illogical in nature.

To say that half the country is racist because they don't support Obama is unbelievably fallacious, and harmful to the Obama campaign.

Nah:» * yawn * Yes, yes, because a substantive rebuttal showing (1) the fallacy being used, (2) why it's fallacious, and (3) demonstrating how and why that makes «Colin's» argument a failure is «stupid» and «ironic» while avoiding being «logical».

* yawn * Yes, yes, because a substantive rebuttal showing (1) the fallacy being used, (2) why it's fallacious, and (3) demonstrating how and why that makes «Colin's» argument a failure is «stupid» and «ironic» while avoiding being «logical».

He did not use fallacious argumentation because he did not logically assert anything.

======== @Spencer «That is, you are making the assumption that just because we do not 100 % understand something, then that means that a god made it happen» @Chad «hmm,, that's not what I said at all, it would be fallacious to claim that just because naturalistic / atheistic evolution hadnt been proved, that theistic evolution is proven.

@Chad «I agree, it would be fallacious to say that JUST because atheistic / naturalistic «evolution» cant be demonstrated, that theistic evolution is true.

«that's not what I said at all, it would be fallacious to claim that just because naturalistic / atheistic evolution hadnt been proved, that theistic evolution is prove» No, that's exactly what you said with «Theistic evolution is the only way to reconcile those two» and now you are playing coy.

You will need to get good at this, because fallacious argumentation is easily cornered.

But, as Eastman and Fales (1984) point out, it is fallacious to infer that because the present is sufficient for inferring the occurrence of a given past history, it explains that history.

But it is quite fallacious to infer that because the present is sufficient for inferring the occurrence of a given past history, it explains that history.

And this fallacious idea of the need to «balance» each other in destructive power has come to be regarded as self - evident to the people of America — because of what President Dwight Eisenhower in his last message to the American people called the «military - industrial complex» and what Alva Myrdal in her book The Game of Disarmament calls the «arms race within the arms race.

At worst, we get the LeVines making preposterously fallacious claims about safety of bedsharing in America because «low SIDS rate in Japan».

Therefore, there is no record of Trickle - Down Economics ever having worked — or having been even tried, because the so - named policy is a fallacious characterization of the actual policy it mocks.

Likewise, Strauss has not yet rescinded her fallacious charge that STC programs are «welfare for the rich» because the donors somehow benefit from the tax credits.

The book reaches too far, from the safe statement that choice alone is not sufficient to a fallacious conclusion that choice is not necessary because it is not sufficient.

So your logic, while seductive, is fallacious, in my opinion, because it doesn't involve the X Factor: the risks inherent to life.»

Ironically, that can be a fallacious argument because being willing to only invest at fair value can actually produce more dividend income over the long run, not less.

And in that context, yes, it is fallacious to assert that your debate opponent's argument should be rejected because of his «opinions,» «funding sources» or «with whom he chooses to spend his time», all of which are irrelevant to the actual merits of his argument.

Bindidon It's not surprising that you give the fully discredited (because of data manipulations and the urban heat island effects) GISS Surface Temperature to support your fallacious point about it being hotter now than in the»30s.

The fallacious reasoning is because temperature is rising at the moment, and CO2 is rising, therefore rising CO2 is causing temperature rise.

The most common fallacious argument is that current climate change must be natural because climate has changed naturally in the past.

Because your statistical reasoning is fallacious.

DS's point is that it is fallacious to argue that CO2 can't have an effect merely because there is so little of it.

Because predictions of a cooling planet made during the 1970s — a number of researchers then believed that increases in the emission of aerosols, such as dust and smog, could put the planet on a path of sustained cooling — turned out to be wrong, climate deniers argue that the current projections could prove to be just as fallacious.

In alphabetical order, «deceitful, dishonest, duplicitous, false, fallacious» — my favourite because it sounds dirty — «sly, sophistic and specious.»