\
  The most prestigious law school admissions discussion board in the world.
BackRefresh Options Favorite

what is the logical flaw where

you ignore the flaws of the singular to protect the bigger p...
Ultramarine wrinkle crackhouse
  09/25/18
idk, seems like some kind of induction fallacy. like using t...
tantric philosopher-king den
  09/25/18
that's like a class vs. instance fuckup in academic writing....
cream fighting garrison
  09/25/18
yeah. it's like lack of attention to detail in the instance....
tantric philosopher-king den
  09/25/18
They would be arguing from probability. The implied premise ...
Misanthropic talented senate
  09/25/18
is that what it's called? good to know, i see that one a lot...
tantric philosopher-king den
  09/25/18
If they argue that something likely happened based on the ex...
Misanthropic talented senate
  09/25/18
Thanks going to leave my car unlocked in the ghetto tonight
infuriating laser beams mediation
  09/25/18


Poast new message in this thread



Reply Favorite

Date: September 25th, 2018 1:08 AM
Author: Ultramarine wrinkle crackhouse

you ignore the flaws of the singular to protect the bigger picture?

specifically fb shitlibs acting like these allegations against kavanaugh should be believed because this shit does happen to women

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4086810&forum_id=2#36882611)



Reply Favorite

Date: September 25th, 2018 1:31 AM
Author: tantric philosopher-king den

idk, seems like some kind of induction fallacy. like using the pattern to predict the instance when we already have enough information about the instance to analyze it without using the pattern, and the pattern is actually less accurate.



(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4086810&forum_id=2#36882682)



Reply Favorite

Date: September 25th, 2018 1:39 AM
Author: cream fighting garrison

that's like a class vs. instance fuckup in academic writing. you're not supposed to attribute qualities to a item in a set based on the set's overall characteristics unless the characteristic is a definitional property of being in the set. you're only supposed to make descriptive/epistemic claims about the item based on qualities directly attributable to that item. that's an analytical error that can destroy your whole thesis.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4086810&forum_id=2#36882700)



Reply Favorite

Date: September 25th, 2018 1:42 AM
Author: tantric philosopher-king den

yeah. it's like lack of attention to detail in the instance.

using just the attributes of the class is going to have a lower accuracy than looking at instances on a case-by-case basis and class-based reasoning is really just a shortcut for when you don't have all the info.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4086810&forum_id=2#36882707)



Reply Favorite

Date: September 25th, 2018 1:53 AM
Author: Misanthropic talented senate

They would be arguing from probability. The implied premise being that some particular event likely happened because we know it happens universally under similar circumstances. A good refutation would be to claim that most crimes require both motive and opportunity. The motive may lay dormant until the right opportunity arises. We understand Brett once ruled against the interests of Ford's mother in a case. But Ford did not have her opportunity until now, and making false accusations is a crime.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4086810&forum_id=2#36882732)



Reply Favorite

Date: September 25th, 2018 1:54 AM
Author: tantric philosopher-king den

is that what it's called? good to know, i see that one a lot.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4086810&forum_id=2#36882735)



Reply Favorite

Date: September 25th, 2018 2:02 AM
Author: Misanthropic talented senate

If they argue that something likely happened based on the existence of circumstantial attributes that it shares with other incidences of a similar or an identical nature, yes, they would be arguing from probability. It may not necessarily be fallacious, either. It all depends on how much assent they can gain to the implied premise. A weakness with their position however is that, since they are the accusers, the burden falls to them to demonstrate beyond all doubt, while their argument aims no higher than establishing that there is a good chance that he did what they allege.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4086810&forum_id=2#36882752)



Reply Favorite

Date: September 25th, 2018 3:43 AM
Author: infuriating laser beams mediation

Thanks going to leave my car unlocked in the ghetto tonight

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4086810&forum_id=2#36883011)