Main Right For The Wrong Reasons Discussion

Collapse/Expand Topics

12:26:46 AM Nov 14th 2017
"The Killing Joke, as quoted, has an example of a crazy person achieving this to show just how far the trope can go. "

The page quote has been changed, and I don't know enough to put the correct quote in. From context I think it's the joke about the asylum escapists crossing the gap between roofs on the beam of a flashlight?
04:51:23 PM Jun 16th 2014
edited by
I'm not sure this is really an example:

Tedd's assumption that Larry is gay is based on the realisation that Larry's crushing on him. It's a correct premise leading to a wrong conclusion, not the other way round.
08:14:19 AM Jun 6th 2013
Did I add the "discovery of the Bystander Effect" example before? I hope I'm not accidentally edit warring here. But I don't see any reason it shouldn't be there.
08:46:59 AM May 4th 2013
Would this example be okay to add? (Sorry, I'm really new and don't have much experience).

Star Wars: This is combined with Fridge Brilliance in Leia's message at the beginning of Episode IV. She tells Obi-Wan, "Years ago you served with my father in the Clone Wars." She thinks she means Bail Organa. However, considering what we find out later: 1. "No, I am your father"; 2. "Leia's my sister"; 3. Darth Vader was once Anakin Skywalker and 4. Obi-Wan's closest partner during the Clone Wars is Anakin Skywalker, it turns out that Leia was unintentionally right...

I think it might fit, but I don't know. Can you guys let me know? Thanks.
07:56:21 AM Jun 6th 2013
I'd say not; it's not a conclusion and the premises aren't wrong as such.
07:14:43 PM Oct 21st 2012

  • In You Fail Logic Forever, there's this example: "Take the fraction 16/64. Now, canceling a six on top and a six on the bottom, we get that 16/64 = 1/4." It's an example of the Fallacy Fallacy, where saying that you can't simply cancel the sixes is treated as saying 16/64 =/= 1/4
    • This also works with 19/95, canceling out the nines to get 1/5. Right for the Wrong Reasons, again.
    • Some of my friends gave those two above as examples, and said that you could always do this to an extremely gullible kid. To his credit, he tried to think of a counterexample. However, he came up with 26/65...

and sticking them here cos they're too amusing to merely consign to the abyss of the internets
10:59:36 AM Apr 24th 2012
I'm not convinced that this is a valid example:
* On the original edition of Hollywood Squares, Buddy Hackett was asked which country had the most doctors, to which Hackett humorously answered "The country with the most Jews! I would say Israel. You have a doctor in every family, could be an uncle, a couple specialists...". The contestant agreed, to Buddy's surprise, but what really surprised him was the fact that it was indeed Israel.
If Hackett was correct in his assumption that Jews are more likely than non-Jews to pursue a career in medicine, then it is perfectly reasonable to conclude that the higher the proportion of Jews in a country's population, the higher the proportion of doctors as well, all else being equal. What reason is there to suppose that his reasons were wrong?
07:16:26 PM Oct 21st 2012
"All else being equal" is why. There are many, many, many, many reasons why one country might have more doctors than another. The proportion of Jews, whether relevant or not, is simply not enough information.

Also, he was joking.
04:28:55 PM Apr 9th 2011
Okay I give up. What does the page quote have to do with the trope at all? I even read the bit in the page proper about it and I fail to see what that story has to do with the trope.
05:42:28 PM Apr 9th 2011
edited by Jerrik
The inmate has come to the right conclusion (getting across the roof that way is a bad idea, so he shouldn't go for it) but his reasons for coming to that conclusion are flawed (he doesn't trust his partner, as opposed to recognizing that the plan couldn't possibly work).
Collapse/Expand Topics