Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
Changed line(s) 1,13 (click to see context) from:
::A fallacy in which one or more of the concepts (or premises) on which an argument depends are (usually implicitly) denied by the argument itself, thus meaning the arguer is taking two or more opposed positions at the same time. [[TropeNamer Named]] by Creator/AynRand (and discussed in more detail [[UsefulNotes/{{Objectivism}} here]]), but arguably discovered earlier. Popular in anti-science literature where scientific processes will be used in an attempt to discredit their own underlying assumptions.
--> "The latest research in zero-point field quantum physics shows that it is possible to make a perpetual motion machine, and that the first law of thermodynamics does not apply in the quantum domain."
::Zero-point field theories include conservation of mass / energy as an assumption. They would disprove ''themselves'' if they actually made this conclusion.
--> "Quantum Physics has proven that reality does not exist objectively" (the less advanced version of the above argument).
::The notion of "proof" assumes the objective existence of something to prove in the first place. Additionally, if nothing existed objectively, there would be ''no'' reliable methods of proof, including Quantum Physics.
Many statements or ideas have been alleged to be [[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-refuting_idea self-refuting]]. Of course, not everyone agrees in each case that they ''are'' self-refuting.
Compare LogicBomb. Contrast CircularReasoning. Not to be confused with SerialNumbersFiledOff.
--> "The latest research in zero-point field quantum physics shows that it is possible to make a perpetual motion machine, and that the first law of thermodynamics does not apply in the quantum domain."
::Zero-point field theories include conservation of mass / energy as an assumption. They would disprove ''themselves'' if they actually made this conclusion.
--> "Quantum Physics has proven that reality does not exist objectively" (the less advanced version of the above argument).
::The notion of "proof" assumes the objective existence of something to prove in the first place. Additionally, if nothing existed objectively, there would be ''no'' reliable methods of proof, including Quantum Physics.
Many statements or ideas have been alleged to be [[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-refuting_idea self-refuting]]. Of course, not everyone agrees in each case that they ''are'' self-refuting.
Compare LogicBomb. Contrast CircularReasoning. Not to be confused with SerialNumbersFiledOff.
to:
--> "The latest research in zero-point field quantum physics shows that it is possible to make a perpetual motion machine, and that the first law of thermodynamics does not apply in the quantum domain."
::Zero-point field theories include conservation of mass / energy as an assumption. They would disprove ''themselves'' if they actually made this conclusion.
--> "Quantum Physics has proven that reality does not exist objectively" (the less advanced version of the above argument).
::The notion of "proof" assumes the objective existence of something to prove in the first place. Additionally, if nothing existed objectively, there would be ''no'' reliable methods of proof, including Quantum Physics.
Many statements or ideas have been alleged to be [[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-refuting_idea self-refuting]]. Of course, not everyone agrees in each case that they ''are'' self-refuting.
Compare LogicBomb. Contrast CircularReasoning. Not to be confused with SerialNumbersFiledOff.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
Many statements or ideas have been alleged to be [[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-refuting_idea self-refuting]]. Of course, not everyone agrees in each case that they ''are'' self-refuting.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 11 (click to see context) from:
Compare LogicBomb. Not to be confused with SerialNumbersFiledOff.
to:
Compare LogicBomb. Contrast CircularReasoning. Not to be confused with SerialNumbersFiledOff.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
namespace stuff fix
Changed line(s) 1,2 (click to see context) from:
::A fallacy in which one or more of the concepts (or premises) on which an argument depends are (usually implicitly) denied by the argument itself, thus meaning the arguer is taking two or more opposed positions at the same time. [[TropeNamer Named]] by AynRand (and discussed in more detail [[{{UsefulNotes/Objectivism}} here]]), but arguably discovered earlier. Popular in anti-science literature where scientific processes will be used in an attempt to discredit their own underlying assumptions.
to:
::A fallacy in which one or more of the concepts (or premises) on which an argument depends are (usually implicitly) denied by the argument itself, thus meaning the arguer is taking two or more opposed positions at the same time. [[TropeNamer Named]] by AynRand Creator/AynRand (and discussed in more detail [[{{UsefulNotes/Objectivism}} [[UsefulNotes/{{Objectivism}} here]]), but arguably discovered earlier. Popular in anti-science literature where scientific processes will be used in an attempt to discredit their own underlying assumptions.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
I really, really could not see how the example given was Stolen Concept, rather than a different logical fallacy.
Changed line(s) 11,14 (click to see context) from:
Compare LogicBomb. Not to be confused with SerialNumbersFiledOff.
!!! Examples:
* In ''{{Dresden Files}}'', in the novel Dead Beat, Dresden is telling Butters about all the evil magical stuff there is out there, and claims that humanity is just in denial about it. When Butters doubts him, Dresden lists some theories that no one wanted to believe - that the Earth isn't the centre of the universe, that the world isn't flat, that germs cause disease, that biologists didn't use to believe in gorillas. But all of those theories are cases where most people generally eventually came around to accepting that the theories are right, implying that humans aren't that good at denying arguments with good supporting evidence. Otherwise the theories wouldn't work as examples of denial, imagine trying to argue that "people don't accept the existence of vampires because they are so good at denial, look at how they deny the divine right of kings, or that the moon is made of blue cheese, or that 2 + 2 = 5."
!!! Examples:
* In ''{{Dresden Files}}'', in the novel Dead Beat, Dresden is telling Butters about all the evil magical stuff there is out there, and claims that humanity is just in denial about it. When Butters doubts him, Dresden lists some theories that no one wanted to believe - that the Earth isn't the centre of the universe, that the world isn't flat, that germs cause disease, that biologists didn't use to believe in gorillas. But all of those theories are cases where most people generally eventually came around to accepting that the theories are right, implying that humans aren't that good at denying arguments with good supporting evidence. Otherwise the theories wouldn't work as examples of denial, imagine trying to argue that "people don't accept the existence of vampires because they are so good at denial, look at how they deny the divine right of kings, or that the moon is made of blue cheese, or that 2 + 2 = 5."
to:
Compare LogicBomb. Not to be confused with SerialNumbersFiledOff.
!!! Examples:
* In ''{{Dresden Files}}'', in the novel Dead Beat, Dresden is telling Butters about all the evil magical stuff there is out there, and claims that humanity is just in denial about it. When Butters doubts him, Dresden lists some theories that no one wanted to believe - that the Earth isn't the centre of the universe, that the world isn't flat, that germs cause disease, that biologists didn't use to believe in gorillas. But all of those theories are cases where most people generally eventually came around to accepting that the theories are right, implying that humans aren't that good at denying arguments with good supporting evidence. Otherwise the theories wouldn't work as examples of denial, imagine trying to argue that "people don't accept the existence of vampires because they are so good at denial, look at how they deny the divine right of kings, or that the moon is made of blue cheese, or that 2 + 2 = 5."SerialNumbersFiledOff.
!!! Examples:
* In ''{{Dresden Files}}'', in the novel Dead Beat, Dresden is telling Butters about all the evil magical stuff there is out there, and claims that humanity is just in denial about it. When Butters doubts him, Dresden lists some theories that no one wanted to believe - that the Earth isn't the centre of the universe, that the world isn't flat, that germs cause disease, that biologists didn't use to believe in gorillas. But all of those theories are cases where most people generally eventually came around to accepting that the theories are right, implying that humans aren't that good at denying arguments with good supporting evidence. Otherwise the theories wouldn't work as examples of denial, imagine trying to argue that "people don't accept the existence of vampires because they are so good at denial, look at how they deny the divine right of kings, or that the moon is made of blue cheese, or that 2 + 2 = 5."
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 11 (click to see context) from:
Compare LogicBomb. Not to be confused with SerialNumbersFiledOff.
to:
Compare LogicBomb. Not to be confused with SerialNumbersFiledOff.SerialNumbersFiledOff.
!!! Examples:
* In ''{{Dresden Files}}'', in the novel Dead Beat, Dresden is telling Butters about all the evil magical stuff there is out there, and claims that humanity is just in denial about it. When Butters doubts him, Dresden lists some theories that no one wanted to believe - that the Earth isn't the centre of the universe, that the world isn't flat, that germs cause disease, that biologists didn't use to believe in gorillas. But all of those theories are cases where most people generally eventually came around to accepting that the theories are right, implying that humans aren't that good at denying arguments with good supporting evidence. Otherwise the theories wouldn't work as examples of denial, imagine trying to argue that "people don't accept the existence of vampires because they are so good at denial, look at how they deny the divine right of kings, or that the moon is made of blue cheese, or that 2 + 2 = 5."
!!! Examples:
* In ''{{Dresden Files}}'', in the novel Dead Beat, Dresden is telling Butters about all the evil magical stuff there is out there, and claims that humanity is just in denial about it. When Butters doubts him, Dresden lists some theories that no one wanted to believe - that the Earth isn't the centre of the universe, that the world isn't flat, that germs cause disease, that biologists didn't use to believe in gorillas. But all of those theories are cases where most people generally eventually came around to accepting that the theories are right, implying that humans aren't that good at denying arguments with good supporting evidence. Otherwise the theories wouldn't work as examples of denial, imagine trying to argue that "people don't accept the existence of vampires because they are so good at denial, look at how they deny the divine right of kings, or that the moon is made of blue cheese, or that 2 + 2 = 5."
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
The other kind of stolen concept
Changed line(s) 11 (click to see context) from:
Compare LogicBomb.
to:
Compare LogicBomb. Not to be confused with SerialNumbersFiledOff.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 9 (click to see context) from:
::The notion of "proof" assumes the objective existence of something to prove in the first place. Additionally, if nothing existed objectively, there would be ''no'' reliable methods of proof, including Quantum Physics.
to:
::The notion of "proof" assumes the objective existence of something to prove in the first place. Additionally, if nothing existed objectively, there would be ''no'' reliable methods of proof, including Quantum Physics.Physics.
Compare LogicBomb.
Compare LogicBomb.
