Thread replies: 4
Thread images: 1
Thread images: 1
Anonymous
Effective formal argumentation. 2017-03-13 07:13:48 Post No. 2501288
[Report] Image search: [Google]
Effective formal argumentation. 2017-03-13 07:13:48 Post No. 2501288
[Report] Image search: [Google]
Hypothetically, if someone were attempting to make a formal argument to the conclusion that "I am an idiot", would it be more effective to draw a purely logical argument filled with supporting facts and as much intellectual rigor that could be asked for; or would it be better to make a really crappy argument riddled with fallacies and nonsense and let the fact that the argument is so incoherent be a meta-argument for the speaker's idiocy?
>>
>>2501288
>God exists
>God created the world 6000 years ago
>therefore *tips fedora*
>>
>>2501288
It depends on if you demand rigorous proof to conclusively determine something, or simply a series of examples to approach the truth.
>>
>>2501288
You can only make the argument "I am an idiot" if you actually are one (from a hypothetical rhetorical point of view), in which case making a logical well performed argument would be improbable anyway.
If you take this away from a rhetorical grouding, then it really depends on how you make your argument and who is listening to it.
Thread posts: 4
Thread images: 1
Thread images: 1