You're looking at Less Wrong's discussion board. This includes all posts, including those that haven't been promoted to the front page yet. For more information, see About Less Wrong.

Val comments on The Sally-Anne fallacy - Less Wrong Discussion

27 Post author: philh 11 April 2016 01:06PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Article Navigation

Comments (27)

Comments (27)

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

Comment author: Val 11 April 2016 09:38:01PM *  6 points [-]

I often encountered (when discussing politics, theology or similar subjective topics) a fallacy which is similar to this one, or maybe it can be seen as the reverse of it.

  • A: ice is hot, therefore 2+2=4
  • B: No, ice is not hot, but even if it was, it still wouldn't be a good proof for 2+2=4
  • A: So you don't believe in the obvious truth that 2+2=4 ?

Also, sometimes A might try to prove 2+2=5 with the same strategy.

Powered by Reddit Powered by Reddit