Sentences with phrase «false argument of»

Hundreds of millions of people have died and suffered under the false argument of «collective good».

I did want to follow up to a few of the comments from you and others on my recent post, The False Arguments of Carol Burris Against High Standards.

Not exact matches

Essentially, Stumpf's argument is that he accepts responsibility for the scandal, but that senior executives did not create a culture that encouraged the type of behavior that led to employees opening 2 million false accounts.

«Elliott has always behaved ethically in its disputes with corporate managements and boards, and it is regrettable and disappointing that certain parties adverse to us would choose to promote false allegations about us rather than engage on the merits of our arguments in good faith.»

In a terse decision, Judge Gregory A. Presnell of the United States District Court in Orlando rejected the former workers» arguments that Disney and the two contractors had colluded to make false statements when they applied for temporary visas, known as H - 1B, for the foreign replacements.

Over the short - term, unfortunately, there is no assurance that investors or analysts will quickly recognize that this market is trading on the basis of false premises about earnings and valuation (though my impression is that those who wake up based on reasoned argument and evidence will be better off than those who wake up based on investment losses).

These arguments derive from the false belief that a recession is defined as two quarters of negative GDP growth.

For them ideas, especially political ones, are badges of elite membership, not notions that could be true or false, not arguments that can be made or refuted.

If, for the sake of argument, evolution is true, then creationism is false.

It's embarrassing that so many Americans, people who say they believe in freedom and equality, have spent so much time and energy trying to justify being anti gay marriage - with false arguments from the Bible (as thought that should be the only source of their decisions).

The idea of an «absolute antidote» suggests a different concept of the human than is presumed in Hitchens's argument: a being capable of enslavement by his darker side, one whose infinite desire for something beyond himself can be short - circuited into various «false infinities» (Ratzinger), who can redeem himself only by restoring the circuitry of his absolute relationship with his Generator.

If you have even that very basic simple fact wrong, it indicates you are basing a portion of your argument on false information.

The best way to meet Boswell's argument is to grant for a moment that the O.T. prohibitions reflect idolatrous worship practices, that homosexual acts are wrong because they are used liturgically in false worship of false gods and goddesses.

Because of the «ism» at the end, making it appear as if it were an ideology, and the fact that they do not understand the definition of the word... and many seek to use a «false equivalency» in a bid to bolster their failed arguments, too.

Thus examination of the argument from parsimony serves finally to suggest not merely that Whiteheadian panpsychism remains unwarranted, but also that it is actually incompatible with what it seems responsible to take to be facts about a physical world, and should therefore be deemed false.

This argument presupposes a false dilemma, as I see it, that either one accepts the notion of a separate soul - substance enduring through time or else one must accept the thesis of process philosophy.

Not because I am in complete agreement with the argument, but because it is a bracing corrective to the false virtue of mediocrity so pervasive in our society, and not least in our churches.

I especially like the parts about the rather abstract sense of victimhood, which blinds us to real suffering, and the assumption that modern thinkers aren't «rational agents» who give arguments that need to be engaged, because they're characteristically neither wholly true nor wholly false.

The resultant reformulation of the ontological argument appears in Tue Logic of Perfection and Anselm's Discovery.52 Hartshorne argues that the statement «perfection exists,» unlike ordinary propositions, can not be contingent; either it is necessarily true or necessarily false.

that is the dumbest argument of all time, and compleatly false.

If someone claims the theory of evolution is false because it contradicts their understanding of what the Bible says, that is not a scientific argument in the ordinary meaning of science.

But besides the sheer prima facie preposterousness of the charge that John Paul II has been taken in by secularist and materialist arguments, my main worry in Prof. Johnson's criticism of the Pope's letter on evolution is the way he continues to suffer under, well, the fallacy of the false dilemma.

What I am saying is that if Michael is an observant Jeu or Muslim he should understand the concept of contributing to another's sin and recognize his argument is false.

While I may use insulting language at times, I in no way say your argument is invalid because of those things, so your ad hominem claim is false.

It's the fallacy of the argument from final consequences — that is, if outcome Y is caused by situation X, and outcome Y is undesirable, then situation X is false.

The basic argument to the book is that the Catholic Pope will be the false prophet of the anti-Christ, Catholicism will be the one world religion of the anti-Christ, and that the Catholic church, in cooperation with worldly governments, has duped Christians into meeting on Sunday rather than on Saturday.

Unfortunately, a lot of what Ayn Rand had to say, was putting up false strawme of the ooposition's arguments and the tearing them down.

However, an argument that is based on a false premise is not able to be used to draw any conclusion of value.

These conclusions suggest that the «public square» has never been — and can never be — denuded of values, despite the best efforts of some groups to promote the historically false argument that American society is based on a strict separation of faith and public life.

It seems as though the political argument is a false one considering there are religious folk on both sides of the aisle these days

Francis said: «The strategy of this skilled «Father of Lies» is precisely mimicry, that sly and dangerous form of seduction that worms its way into the heart with false and alluring arguments.»

Otherwise, he is guilty of constructing a false argument.

You're attacking the person, not the argument, when you attempt your false analogy of blindness.

Argument from ignorance: the proposition (The God of Israel is not real) is true because it has not yet been proven false, it is «generally accepted».

My argument that a false assertion of necessity should lead to absurdities, whereas «it is necessary that something exists» leads to none, is not, I feel, done full justice to.

In his famous interview, Danielou warned against such arguments, saying that «with the pretext of reacting against formalism» there has arisen a «false conception of freedom that brings with it the devaluing of the constitutions and rules and exalts spontaneity and improvisation» and an «erroneous conception of the changing of man and of the Church.»

Natural law arguments undermine this false equation of progressive prejudice with reason itself.

I disagree, lack of scientific knowledge does not increase the argument for an intelligent designer, that's a false dichotomy fallacy.

(Again false as just illustrated above and again attacking me personally rather than my argument) None of these have anything to do with the point of discussion in this thread.

It is an obvious and extreme example of just what I am talking about; an ignorant straw man and false premise on which you base your counter argument.

Carl, saying that RH's use of a fallacy «thereby conceded the argument» is itself a fallacy, The «Argument From Fallacy» Fallacy, which sis the potentially faulty assumption that if an argument for some conclusion is fallacious, then the conclusion itself iargument» is itself a fallacy, The «Argument From Fallacy» Fallacy, which sis the potentially faulty assumption that if an argument for some conclusion is fallacious, then the conclusion itself iArgument From Fallacy» Fallacy, which sis the potentially faulty assumption that if an argument for some conclusion is fallacious, then the conclusion itself iargument for some conclusion is fallacious, then the conclusion itself is false.

His pupil, Nicole Oresme, realized this argument was false because the arrow inherits the motion of the earth when it is fired.

For the folks commenting that God can see thru your false belief, Pascal addressed that: «Following his argument establishing the Wager, Pascal addressed the possibility that some people may not be willing to sincerely believe in God even after acknowledging the enormous benefit of betting in favor of God's existence.

You've now invoked 2 of the classic fallacies of logical argument: point to a false cause and attack the person.

Therefore as noble as the «end of discrimination» sounds and as appealing a bumper sticker as it makes, it is really a false argument.

Just that the argument «Hitters need to have abs of steel to hit» is patently false.

As demonstrated above your points of argument were senseless, while you made false claims about what Wenger said.

Although there is a strong argument to be had that there exists a Cult of Obstetrics that monopolizes and manipulates many women's laboring decisions — allowing them to buy into the false idea that hospital birth is the only viable option.

The «false sense of security» is an old argument against bans, and not particularly valid.

Oftentimes, these arguments have resorted to the concept of false consciousness.