[001]
130.60.163.182
Current Version
Changed line(s) 1 from:
n
I noticed LudicrousPrecision got deleted, because it \
to:
I noticed LudicrousPrecision got deleted, because it \\\"isn\\\'t a real logical fallacy\\\". Not wanting to start an edit war, I think we should discuss it here.
Technically, it\\\'s true that Fake Precision isn\\\'t a true logical fallacy (i.e. it doesn\\\'t deal with formal logic), but the sdame can be said of many other examples listed here, e.g. ChewbaccaDefense, AdHominem or \\\"Appeal to X\\\"). Nevertheless, they are all still usually listed among other fallacies, and LudicrousPrecision, while not constituting an argument, still presents a logical [[http://www.fallacyfiles.org/glossary.html#Boobytrap Boobytrap]]. A proper argument basing a premise on LudicrousPrecision will have a questionable premise and can therefore be classified as (informally) fallacious.
In conclusion, I think LudicrousPrecision (in its real-life applications at least) deserves to be listed on this page. If it is not, then we should delete many other examples on here as well.
Technically, it\\\'s true that Fake Precision isn\\\'t a true logical fallacy (i.e. it doesn\\\'t deal with formal logic), but the sdame can be said of many other examples listed here, e.g. ChewbaccaDefense, AdHominem or \\\"Appeal to X\\\"). Nevertheless, they are all still usually listed among other fallacies, and LudicrousPrecision, while not constituting an argument, still presents a logical [[http://www.fallacyfiles.org/glossary.html#Boobytrap Boobytrap]]. A proper argument basing a premise on LudicrousPrecision will have a questionable premise and can therefore be classified as (informally) fallacious.
In conclusion, I think LudicrousPrecision (in its real-life applications at least) deserves to be listed on this page. If it is not, then we should delete many other examples on here as well.
