- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Pay Attention Politards: THIS Is How You Win A Real Debate
Posted on 5/19/14 at 4:59 pm to Revelator
Posted on 5/19/14 at 4:59 pm to Revelator
quote:
How is an opposing team supposed to rebut a personal experience and what criteria can be used to validate that the experience is even factual?
I understand your point, but let's just say that one of the debaters on the subject of the President's war powers was a combat veteran. Wouldn't that particular experience be relevant to the subject? Should that person's experience be kicked out as conjecture because it cannot be validated?
Posted on 5/19/14 at 5:04 pm to upgrayedd
quote:
but let's just say that one of the debaters on the subject of the President's war powers was a combat veteran. Wouldn't that particular experience be relevant to the subject?
nope, unless he was involved in policy making or a clerk on the court case, and then happened to go to war
quote:
Should that person's experience be kicked out as conjecture because it cannot be validated?
it should be kicked out for being irrelevant to the discussion at hand
Posted on 5/19/14 at 5:23 pm to upgrayedd
quote:
I understand your point, but let's just say that one of the debaters on the subject of the President's war powers was a combat veteran. Wouldn't that particular experience be relevant to the subject? Should that person's experience be kicked out as conjecture because it cannot be validated?
Yep
quote:
Appeal to Authority
Explanation
An appeal to authority is an argument from the fact that a person judged to be an authority affirms a proposition to the claim that the proposition is true.
Appeals to authority are always deductively fallacious; even a legitimate authority speaking on his area of expertise may affirm a falsehood, so no testimony of any authority is guaranteed to be true.
However, the informal fallacy occurs only when the authority cited either (a) is not an authority, or (b) is not an authority on the subject on which he is being cited. If someone either isn’t an authority at all, or isn’t an authority on the subject about which they’re speaking, then that undermines the value of their testimony.
Logical Fallacies
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News