Logical fallacies and cognitive biases illustrated with syscourse. Not all examples will be of things actually commonly seen in syscourse. Pro-endo, pro-tulpa, pro-good faith identities.
Don't wanna be here? Send us removal request.
Statistics
We looked inside some of the posts by syscourse-fallacies and here's what we found interesting.
Average Info
Notes Per Post
11
Likes Per Post
3
Reblog Per Post
4
Reply Per Post
4
Time Between Posts
23 seconds
Number of Posts By Type
Text
2
Last Seen Tumblr Blogs
Fun Fact
China blocked Tumblr because of pornography and censorship problems in 2013.
Text
It's here!
I'm thinking about making a sideblog/gimmick blog that's focused on illustrating* logical fallacies with syscourse examples. Not all examples would be things that are actually discussed with any kind of regularity, but it may be fun and may spark some discussion on things that aren't talked about to death here. What do you think?
*Not intended to be with actual art.
8 notes
·
View notes
Text
Affirming a Disjunct:
This fallacy is: "Either traumagenic or endogenic causes can cause plurality. Trauma can cause DID. Therefore endogenic causes cannot cause plurality."
This is a fallacy because it assumes that if A (trauma causation), then not B (endogenic causation.) There's nothing proving that the two are exclusive to each other in the claims, nor that they can't both be true at the same time. For a different example:
Either Mary is a human or Mary is a woman. Mary is provably a human, therefore Mary cannot be a woman.
But both can be true at the same time because each side of the argument does not preclude the other.
A properly formatted logical disjunct would be "Either trauma CAN cause plurality, or trauma can NOT cause plurality. Trauma has been proven to cause plurality, therefore 'trauma cannot cause plurality' is false."
There's also the fallacy of assuming that since DID contains plurality, all plurality is DID. That fallacy will be addressed in another post.
3 notes
·
View notes