"There's this theory that if there were an infinite number of monkeys pecking away at typewriters, they would eventually write the great works of Shakespeare, but thanks to the internet we now know that's not true." -Adam Savage
"Time is not made out of lines. It is made out of circles. That is why clocks are round." -Caboose
NOTE: This is my new primary account. My old account was AgentCOPP1, and I changed it because it was linked to a gamertag that I no longer use.
Posted by: Xplode441
Here are the posts in question:
Posted by: AgentCOP1
Posted by: xODSTxDutch
So everyone deserves the right to have the ability to take someones life?
Well I guess so, considering that we all own knives in our house. If you don't like the fact that you can take someone's life, why don't you go ahead and ban guns, knives, axes, spears, forks, saws, blades, maces, bow and arrows, pillows, cars, and hammers. Those can all kill people.
King Dutchy simply calls out a False equivalence (what he calls a equivalency fallacy). While it is true that a gun is a much more effective weapon, it doesn't take away from the point that was being made.
AgentCOP was in fact correct by stating that everything he listed can in fact kill people. He was responding to a question being made by ODST in which ODST was applying an appeal to emotion in that a gun can be used to take someones life, and questioning why people should have guns. AgentCop came back and says that there are many forms of weapons that are in fact used to kill people, but not in the same magnitude as firearms. If in fact no one deserved the right to take a life in any situation, then AgentCop is correct in stating that no one should then be allowed to own a weapon. Which is a valid response to ODST's question. He responds to ODST's uncomfortableness with gun ownership.
Simply Syllogism.
A weapon gives you the ability to take someone's life.
These are all weapons
Therefore these give you the ability to take someone's life.
That is a valid statement by syllogism.
A false equivalence does not apply to this situation as AgentCOP is not comparing the magnitude or the equality of the firearms ability to that of the rest of the listed items, he is showing their common trait that they all carry, which is the ability to take someones life.
Therefore, we've been arguing a point that should never have existed.
King Dutchy did invoke a fallacy fallacy though:
Posted by: King Dutchy
Posted by: Xplode441
Posted by: King Dutchy
Dat equivalency fallacy.Fallacy fallacy, assuming that someone's argument is rendered moot because of the use of a fallacy. StahpWell...it kinda does.
Holy crap dude....
you are insanely smart.