-
This forum is strictly intended to be used by members of the VS Battles wiki. Please only register if you have an autoconfirmed account there, as otherwise your registration will be rejected. If you have already registered once, do not do so again, and contact Antvasima if you encounter any problems.
For instructions regarding the exact procedure to sign up to this forum, please click here. -
We need Patreon donations for this forum to have all of its running costs financially secured.
Community members who help us out will receive badges that give them several different benefits, including the removal of all advertisements in this forum, but donations from non-members are also extremely appreciated.
Please click here for further information, or here to directly visit our Patreon donations page. -
Please click here for information about a large petition to help children in need.
- 11,444
- 1,997
They're only meant to be examples and are therefore inherently false, but I see your point.
The Appeal to Authority Fallacy isn't used much on this wiki, generally because when someone says it, they actually know what they're talking about. Nevertheless, it is a good thing to point out, especially when citing Word of God entries like Nasu's.
I think I'll try to call in Azathoth to take a look at this.
The Appeal to Authority Fallacy isn't used much on this wiki, generally because when someone says it, they actually know what they're talking about. Nevertheless, it is a good thing to point out, especially when citing Word of God entries like Nasu's.
I think I'll try to call in Azathoth to take a look at this.
- 11,444
- 1,997
I haven't seen it much from other people (though in hindsight I've probably used it to end arguments), so I suppose I'm looking on the wrong threads.
The Appeal to Authority Fallacy can still be applied to author statements if they're blatantly contradictory.
For example, according to Nasu, the Low 2-C Void Shiki with incredible control over Concepts cannot defeat any Servant and can only fight a defensive battle with them.
By using an Appeal to Authority fallacy here, one is implying that Servants are Low 2-C or that Void Shiki is only Tier 7, which is quite frankly ridiculous.
The Appeal to Authority Fallacy can still be applied to author statements if they're blatantly contradictory.
For example, according to Nasu, the Low 2-C Void Shiki with incredible control over Concepts cannot defeat any Servant and can only fight a defensive battle with them.
By using an Appeal to Authority fallacy here, one is implying that Servants are Low 2-C or that Void Shiki is only Tier 7, which is quite frankly ridiculous.
- 10,674
- 6,326
Yeah, Appeal to Authority should be re-added. Its a very serious issue, though luckily I don't see it to much here anymore.
- 841
- 40
- Thread starter
- #6
And also, I think it is very important that you actually focus on the part of the argument that is FALLACIOUS, so like the Fallacy of Division example could be phrased as following:
"The Naruto verse is countless orders of magnitude stronger than the OPverse, therefore Haku can effortlessly oneshot Whitebeard and Gol D Roger by blinking"
"The Naruto verse is countless orders of magnitude stronger than the OPverse, therefore Haku can effortlessly oneshot Whitebeard and Gol D Roger by blinking"
- 841
- 40
- Thread starter
- #8
Well, I can fix a few of the outdated examples
Fallacy of Division: see above
Poisoning the Well: "Person A is known for being a biased Naruto fanboy, therefore you shouldn't listen to him when he says Naruto can beat Golden Age Superman."
Ad hominem tu quoque: Person A: "It was never stated that Buu's power level was 200 nonillion, that's a lie." Person B: "Well you lied when you said that Post-Crisis Superman destroyed a good chunk of the universe by himself!"
Figure of speech: "It was mentioned in LoTR that Sam performed an action "as quick as lightning". That means he could move at MHS+ (over Mach 1K) speed."
Style over substance fallacy: "In DBZ, all the battles have flashy afterimages, speed lines, blurs, and other effects. This obviously means that they're faster than every character who rarely (if ever) leaves afterimages or has any of those effects.
Fallacy of exclusive premises: "No Bleach characters are faster than light. Some Bleach characters cannot blitz Naruto fodder. Therefore, some characters that are faster than light cannot blitz Naruto fodder. Therefore, Naruto fodder is relativistic+ if not higher, and the top tiers are MFTL+ via powerscaling."
Argumentum ad verbosium: "Even low tiers in the HST can easily blitz Servants from Fate/stay night, since in F/HA it was explicitly stated that Lancer's Gae Bolg was only able to travel at Mach 2 (680.58 m/s, 2450.088 km/h, 1522.4141 mph, 0.00000227017c, 1489 cubits per second, faster than a cheetah by about 22.5x), and the idea of Mach 13.15 Servants based on some empty, unfounded calculation that involves moving faster than the eye can see (faster than the eye can see calcs generally are the least reliable form of calcs, since they can often be hyperbole and are very confusing in general and are in general hard to calculate) and I honestly cannot believe that Servants, who have been compared to jet fighters (Mach 2.35 or 799.6815 m/s tops) could honestly display speeds well into hypersonic in any way whatsoever, so this is an utterly stupid debate when it comes down to it because of all the above reasons and the fact that Nasu (who is the author and therefore has absolute omnipotent authority over their text) himself has directly stated that they are well below hypersonic and are you honestly stating that your authority is below that of Nasu? kek"
Biased Sample: "Everyone on Marvel Comics FTW Forum strongly claim that Marvel >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> DC in quality, therefore Marvel is far greater than DC in terms of quality"
Appeal to motive: "Example: "You only think CAS could beat Goku because you hate DBZ!"
etc
There are still many more to do, however.
Fallacy of Division: see above
Poisoning the Well: "Person A is known for being a biased Naruto fanboy, therefore you shouldn't listen to him when he says Naruto can beat Golden Age Superman."
Ad hominem tu quoque: Person A: "It was never stated that Buu's power level was 200 nonillion, that's a lie." Person B: "Well you lied when you said that Post-Crisis Superman destroyed a good chunk of the universe by himself!"
Figure of speech: "It was mentioned in LoTR that Sam performed an action "as quick as lightning". That means he could move at MHS+ (over Mach 1K) speed."
Style over substance fallacy: "In DBZ, all the battles have flashy afterimages, speed lines, blurs, and other effects. This obviously means that they're faster than every character who rarely (if ever) leaves afterimages or has any of those effects.
Fallacy of exclusive premises: "No Bleach characters are faster than light. Some Bleach characters cannot blitz Naruto fodder. Therefore, some characters that are faster than light cannot blitz Naruto fodder. Therefore, Naruto fodder is relativistic+ if not higher, and the top tiers are MFTL+ via powerscaling."
Argumentum ad verbosium: "Even low tiers in the HST can easily blitz Servants from Fate/stay night, since in F/HA it was explicitly stated that Lancer's Gae Bolg was only able to travel at Mach 2 (680.58 m/s, 2450.088 km/h, 1522.4141 mph, 0.00000227017c, 1489 cubits per second, faster than a cheetah by about 22.5x), and the idea of Mach 13.15 Servants based on some empty, unfounded calculation that involves moving faster than the eye can see (faster than the eye can see calcs generally are the least reliable form of calcs, since they can often be hyperbole and are very confusing in general and are in general hard to calculate) and I honestly cannot believe that Servants, who have been compared to jet fighters (Mach 2.35 or 799.6815 m/s tops) could honestly display speeds well into hypersonic in any way whatsoever, so this is an utterly stupid debate when it comes down to it because of all the above reasons and the fact that Nasu (who is the author and therefore has absolute omnipotent authority over their text) himself has directly stated that they are well below hypersonic and are you honestly stating that your authority is below that of Nasu? kek"
Biased Sample: "Everyone on Marvel Comics FTW Forum strongly claim that Marvel >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> DC in quality, therefore Marvel is far greater than DC in terms of quality"
Appeal to motive: "Example: "You only think CAS could beat Goku because you hate DBZ!"
etc
There are still many more to do, however.
- 165,252
- 72,312
I remember that I edited away various fallacies that did not fit into our wiki system long ago, but do not remember well. For example, we do have to maintain a certain hierarchy of authority regarding knowledge of our system, with DarkLK at the top.
- 2,150
- 184
Wait please don't tell me we're removing some of these. I value that page highly as it can severely improve one's debate skills.
- 165,252
- 72,312
@Skodwarde I suppose that a few of the examples could be updated, if they have turned inaccurate with time, but I would likely need to look over the page again. I remember that I made quite an effort cleaning it up long ago, so I don't want it to become randomly messed up.
@HIT IT Technically, you probably are. I would prefer if we do not start to mess with important regulations pages, especially not outside of a staff only discussion.
@HIT IT Technically, you probably are. I would prefer if we do not start to mess with important regulations pages, especially not outside of a staff only discussion.
- 8,678
- 5,556
Wasn't this page pasted from the OBD anyways?
- 8,678
- 5,556
Looking at the OBD page, it was.
- 3,260
- 293
If the page was copy+pasted from OBD, should the page be looked over, or can we leave it alone as it is?
Edit: It seems that Ant has re-edited some of the terms in the page. I am fine with leaving it as it is.
Edit: It seems that Ant has re-edited some of the terms in the page. I am fine with leaving it as it is.
- 11,444
- 1,997
To be fair, HIT IT wasn't doing anything drastic, it's just that some of the statements are indeed outdated and we might want to update/modify them. As far as I can tell, the one's he's posted above are in-line with the fallacies described.
I actually support these changes, but of course we need approval to make them. I also messaged Azathoth about this, but he appears to be busy.
I actually support these changes, but of course we need approval to make them. I also messaged Azathoth about this, but he appears to be busy.
- 11,444
- 1,997
They're mostly nitpicking and I'm honestly not sure if these are wrong and I'm just being overly technical, but here are a few more:
Argument from Belief:
"It's my opinion that DBZ characters are faster than light, so they are."
The vast majority of DBZ characters are FTL by our current ratings.
Burden of Proof Fallacy:
""Goku is faster than light speed because you can't prove he's not!"
Same issue as above.
Appeal to Tradition: "There can't be a Naruto character that can beat Luffy, because it's always been known that Naruto characters are no match for him."
The vast majority of important Naruto characters can in fact stomp Luffy.
Once again, in hindsight, these statements are probably still good examples, but they look rather peculiar next to our current ratings.
Argument from Belief:
"It's my opinion that DBZ characters are faster than light, so they are."
The vast majority of DBZ characters are FTL by our current ratings.
Burden of Proof Fallacy:
""Goku is faster than light speed because you can't prove he's not!"
Same issue as above.
Appeal to Tradition: "There can't be a Naruto character that can beat Luffy, because it's always been known that Naruto characters are no match for him."
The vast majority of important Naruto characters can in fact stomp Luffy.
Once again, in hindsight, these statements are probably still good examples, but they look rather peculiar next to our current ratings.
- 11,484
- 7,685
Those examples are still perfectly okay, since it is meant to highlight a flaw in argumentation/reasoning, not a flaw with conclusion.
Using an improper argument to immediately discredit the conclusion that the poor point was used to defend is even called the ironic "Fallacy Fallacy"
So while Goku may actually be FTL, those examples would still be classified as fallacies.
However to avoid confusion, it may be best to rename the hypothetical character into someone who isn't FTL. Maybe just Naruto or Luffy for now. Not really something we need to give much thought towards.
Using an improper argument to immediately discredit the conclusion that the poor point was used to defend is even called the ironic "Fallacy Fallacy"
So while Goku may actually be FTL, those examples would still be classified as fallacies.
However to avoid confusion, it may be best to rename the hypothetical character into someone who isn't FTL. Maybe just Naruto or Luffy for now. Not really something we need to give much thought towards.
Similar threads
