= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
AndyWood comments on Open Thread: February 2010, part 2 - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (857)
Here's a question that I sure hope someone here knows the answer to:
What do you call it when someone, in an argument, tries to cast two different things as having equal standing, even though they are hardly even comparable? Very common example: in an atheism debate, the believer says "atheism takes just as much faith as religion does!"
It seems like there must be a word for this, but I can't think what it is. ??
Fair and balanced reporting.
False equivalence?
Aha! I think this one is closest to what I have in mind. Thanks.
It's interesting to me that "false equivalence" doesn't seem to have nearly as much discussion around it (at least, based on a cursory google survey) as most of the other fallacies. I seem to see this used for rhetorical mischief all the time!
This is a great example of a "pitch". I've added it just now to the database of pitches:
http://www.takeonit.com/pitch/the_equivalence_pitch.aspx
Closest I know is "tu quoque".
That is pretty close. If I understand them right, I think the difference is:
Tu Quoque: X is also guilty of Y, (therefore Z).
False Equivalence: (X is also guilty of Y), therefore Z.
where the parentheses indicate the major location of error.