Citat:
În prealabil postat de abaaaabbbb63
6. Saying that because one finds something di cult to
understand, it’s therefore not true.
Subjects such as biological evolution via the process of natural selection
require a good amount of understanding before one is able to properly grasp
them; this fallacy is usually used in place of that understanding.
|
Sau poti sa zici ca ai inteles ceva dar de fapt sa nu intelegi nimic si sa-i crezi orbeste pe aia. E si mai usor, decat sa gandesti cu capul tau.
Si atunci vii si spui : Nu putem observa evolutia. Dar vedeti cainii ?
Citat:
În prealabil postat de abaaaabbbb63
3. Assuming that what’s true about one part of something
has to be applied to all, or other, parts of it.
Often when something is true for the part it does also apply to the whole, but because this isn’t always the case it can’t be presumed to be true. We must show evidence for why a consistency will exist.
|
.
Unde se incadreaza Dawkins atunci cand ii face ipocriti pe aia care folosesc automobilul desi cred ca pamantul are 6000 de ani ? Aia sigur nu e eroare logica, sigur a citit wikipedia inainte sa spuna asta.
