Theos-Talk Archives (December 2001 Message tt00327)

Hi danielhcaldwell,
Friday, 14 December, 2001, you wrote various things concerning the
apparently fruitless argument about what HPB allegedly did or did not
do.


Actually I sympathise with you - most of the so called arguments
citing "proof" of this or that are logically fatally flawed. But that
is common in most arguments these days because many people do not know
all the tricks and traps of rhetoric and propaganda employed to
promote one view over anothers.

Happily, a thorough explanation is available here:
http://www.datanation.com/fallacies/index.htm
and elsewhere on the web, just search for "logical fallacies"

There you will find that many who feel argue here are addicted to
fallacies such as the:

>From Ignorance fallacy - "because something is not known to be true,
it is assumed to be false

Complex Question: two unrelated points are conjoined as a single
proposition.

Prejudicial Language: value or moral goodness is attached to believing
the author.

False Analogy: the two objects or events being compared are relevantly
dissimilar

Fallacy of Exclusion: evidence which would change the outcome of an
inductive argument is excluded from consideration

Post Hoc: because one thing precedes the other, it is held
to cause the other

Begging the Question: the truth of the conclusion is assumed by the
premises.

... and so on. There are many more.


Best regards,
Alan

mailto:alwilli@iafrica.com