• Nevoic@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    7 months ago

    Exactly. And saying “what about” isn’t always a fallacy. That’s like thinking anyone says a natural fact they’re committing a naturalistic fallacy.

      • Nevoic@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        7 months ago

        Yup, you can also make comparisons to irrelevant things. Not all comparisons are fallacious.

        The way the CIA/IDF behave compared to other “terrorist” organizations is relevant to the etymology of the word. I don’t see how the Grand Canyon relates to any point you or I made.

          • Nevoic@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            7 months ago

            Oh wow, I didn’t get it until this message, fuck I’m an idiot. All comparisons are always fallacious. Thanks for helping me out, friend.

            • FiniteBanjo
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              edit-2
              7 months ago

              But what about Jeffrey Epstein? Jeffrey Epstein ran a terrorist organization and this cult ran a terrorist organization and therefor Jeffrey Epstein is involved in the MOVE cult. And the CIA. /sarcasm

              • Nevoic@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                7 months ago

                Yeah, that was my point. I can’t believe I didn’t see what my own point was until you cleared it up for me. It wasn’t about how “terrorist was a loaded word” even though that’s what I said.

                I’m glad you’re here to clear up the difference between what I said and what I meant, otherwise I’d be genuinely lost.

                Keep it coming.