Ask Lemmy

26933 readers

901 users here now

A Fediverse community for open-ended, thought provoking questions

Please don't post about US Politics. If you need to do this, try [email protected]

Rules: (interactive)

1) Be nice and; have fun

Doxxing, trolling, sealioning, racism, and toxicity are not welcomed in AskLemmy. Remember what your mother said: if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. In addition, the site-wide Lemmy.world terms of service also apply here. Please familiarize yourself with them

2) All posts must end with a '?'

This is sort of like Jeopardy. Please phrase all post titles in the form of a proper question ending with ?

3) No spam

Please do not flood the community with nonsense. Actual suspected spammers will be banned on site. No astroturfing.

4) NSFW is okay, within reason

Just remember to tag posts with either a content warning or a [NSFW] tag. Overtly sexual posts are not allowed, please direct them to either [email protected] or [email protected]. NSFW comments should be restricted to posts tagged [NSFW].

5) This is not a support community.

It is not a place for 'how do I?', type questions. If you have any questions regarding the site itself or would like to report a community, please direct them to Lemmy.world Support or email [email protected]. For other questions check our partnered communities list, or use the search function.

Reminder: The terms of service apply here too.

Partnered Communities:

Logo design credit goes to: tubbadu

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

Justifying one thing because it's a necessary component of another unnecessary thing... what logical fallacy is that? (lemmy.world)

submitted 11 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

124 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

And I'll paste my other example here:

Another example might involve arguing that the disposal of hazardous waste is necessary because it's a byproduct of a particular manufacturing process, while ignoring the question of whether that manufacturing process itself is essential or necessary. This fallacy occurs when one justifies an undesirable or harmful element as a necessary component of a larger practice or system without questioning the necessity of the entire system or practice.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 11 months ago

I think this makes sense!

It appears to be a type of irrelevant conclusion.

An irrelevant conclusion... is the informal fallacy of presenting an argument that may or may not be logically valid and sound, but (whose conclusion) fails to address the issue in question.

http://www.philosophypages.com/lg/e06a.htm

Is this what you were thinking?