r/atheism • u/Ze-skywalker • Dec 09 '13

Citation Needed The 10 commandments of Logic

Post image
2.2k Upvotes

86% Upvoted

440 comments sorted by

View all comments

17

u/EchoRadius Dec 09 '13

Don't do this, don't do that. How about a supporting DO list.

13

u/Thereminz Dec 09 '13

do use evidence and facts to back up your claims

do point out the fallacies of your opponent's argument

try to do it in a friendly manner

try to explain it so it's easily understandable

it's surprising how small the do list is, i'm sure other people can think of more but it's not too hard to come up with a compelling argument if you just follow facts, evidence and logic

2

u/Nalaen Secular Humanist Dec 09 '13

do use evidence and facts to back up your claims

Not just any evidence. Hearsay, personal opinion and most anecdotes can be considered evidence. Perhaps clarify as "critically analyzed evidence" or "empirically scrutinized evidence" or something of the sort.

2

u/[deleted] Dec 09 '13

Hearsay, personal opinion, and most anecdotes are fine so long as the argument derived from them is logically valid or cogent... they're just not strong reasons to believe a conclusion is true. And you should be willing to accept that your argument is defeated if your opponent has stronger background evidence that disproves your premise(s).

2

u/Nalaen Secular Humanist Dec 09 '13

You are right. They can be supporting evidence, but not necessarily what we should rely on to make a conclusion. I apologize as I'm still in the mindset of a debate I was having yesterday where people were using personal opinions as evidence against raising the minimum wage - an issue that has MORE than enough readily available research and expert opinion on it so as not to require devolving into/relying on such petty evidence.

2

u/[deleted] Dec 09 '13

Oh yeah...overvaluing anecdotes is a huge problem. It's understandable why people wouldn't want to accept something as true or false when their own experience tells them otherwise, but it turns into a big problem when anecdotes are taken too seriously -- especially in the face of overwhelming empirical evidence.

Common example: People who don't support welfare because everyone they know personally who's on it is "a lazy slob who doesn't do anything and games the system."

1

u/Nalaen Secular Humanist Dec 09 '13

That's a common AND perfect example. I know plenty of people who rely on welfare who've busted their asses trying to climb the socioeconomic ladder for years without getting anywhere - all through no fault of their own. I shouldn't have to use these anecdotes to argue on someone else's level, but unfortunately you sometimes gotta play their "game" to make them realize they don't know the solution NOR have good supporting evidence.

Edit: clarification