Film, Media & TV2 mins ago
What Is The Name Of This Logical Fallacy
8 Answers
I was in a conversation with a guy who said "You might not find soldiers being injured or killed, a form of entertaiment but some people do and who are you to stand in their way?
This was after I confronted someone for mocking the deaths of soldiers in a military group on some website.
This was after I confronted someone for mocking the deaths of soldiers in a military group on some website.
Answers
1 to 8 of 8
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by Trevorblack2014. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Here are a few websites that might explain this type of behaviour, although I tend to go for the 'lack of empathy' one:
http://
https:/
http://
http://
https:/
This attitude resembles that shown by German troops in WW2, who executed defenceless civilians in occupied zones.
http://
https:/
http://
http://
https:/
This attitude resembles that shown by German troops in WW2, who executed defenceless civilians in occupied zones.
@Trevorblack2014
Although the example the other person chose is abhorrent to most of us they are basically just pushing the boundaries of "freedom of speech/thought" to its very limits.
Which is kind of the point of most freedom of speech arguments: how repellent/intolerant/unempathic/perverted are we willing to put up with.
The catch is, once you draw a line *anywhere* you can no longer claim to uphold freedom of speech in your country. Some countries make much more of a fuss about it than others. Britain does not have a formal constitution to get hung up about.
Anyway I see no logical fallacy. I do, however see crapulence. (you won't find that in the dictionary though; please don't pass it on).
Although the example the other person chose is abhorrent to most of us they are basically just pushing the boundaries of "freedom of speech/thought" to its very limits.
Which is kind of the point of most freedom of speech arguments: how repellent/intolerant/unempathic/perverted are we willing to put up with.
The catch is, once you draw a line *anywhere* you can no longer claim to uphold freedom of speech in your country. Some countries make much more of a fuss about it than others. Britain does not have a formal constitution to get hung up about.
Anyway I see no logical fallacy. I do, however see crapulence. (you won't find that in the dictionary though; please don't pass it on).
-- answer removed --
-- answer removed --
1 to 8 of 8
