Fallacious Argument

1421 Words 6 Pages
A new theory on fallacies should not just reassign terms to fallacies so people will feel better, which is the politically-correct agenda (What would we call fallacious arguments? Logically challenged discourse?) Rather, we don’t even need a “new” view, we need a view that has been around since humans first started contemplating speech, and that is to find meaning in an argument for the sake of meaning—a meaning that addresses the very fallacious nature of being human.
We can concur with current theory concerning ideas that we establish meaning in discourse. When we communicate with each other, or internally with our own minds, we build toward developing a new meaning atop older meaning. Building meaning, not unlike a scientific process,
…show more content…
The person who makes that statement of "love it or leave it" may very well believe that idea, and if we counter the idea, the person can assert “I am entitled to my own opinion,” which ends argument but maintains disagreement and lack of conclusion. People use valid and fallacious arguments in constructing their own meaning, such as “love it or leave it,” and when they express those thoughts, the fallacy is attached to the idea. In this manner of attachment, the person is wrong—if the person is assigning their value to the idea, which we often do. Further the negative impact of being “wrong” can be quite intense concerning a person 's faith or belief that rests on fallacious reasoning.
So the question for a theory of fallacies is how to be non-combative and yet corrective of fallacious statements. No quick fix seems evident, and for a theory on fallacies to have any use, it must not fall into older theories of the rules existing and argument fitting the rules or not, nor must we rely on subjective reasoning of each situation to then decide if an argument is false or not. In order to look at fallacies in a different way than current theory does, we need to expand on our concept of building
…show more content…
We have many fallacious levels to our minds, to our sense of who we are, and yet these fallacious aspects of ourselves do not suggest we are inherently wrong. A Study of Human Fallacy is not a method of revealing flaws or incorrect aspects of people, such as psychiatry attempts to figure out. A Study of Human Fallacy, like much of literature, is a study of how we can become more and more aware of our imperfections—and, obviously, if we are aware of our imperfections, we must have some ideal of a perfect human. However, one of our inherent imperfections is that not every one would agree on what a perfect human is, and yet we continually attempt to figure out what a perfect person is. The human fallacy is our search for something that cannot be answered, and our greatest human fallacy is the search for the ideal, the perfect human. Perhaps the great human tragedy is that we cannot “correct” this fallacy; we simply cannot stop ourselves from seeking this ideal, this perfect human, even though we are quite aware that we can never find it or achieve being

Related Documents