Comment by James_K
5 months ago
The fact that lies can be repeated has no relevance on my position that this sentiment is repeated because it's true. If you want to argue with the statement, produce an argument instead of an unrelated sarcastic comment.
So you claim that something being repeatedly posted is a useful signal to determine if it's true, but you only apply it to something that you already believe is true.
But it somehow isn't a useful signal once it's something you personally don't know is true or believe is false. How does that make any sense?
Sounds like textbook confirmation bias. Should be included as a real life example in the definitions.
> you claim that something being repeatedly posted is a useful signal to determine if it's true
No I don't, you dolt. Learn which way the implication goes. "It is repeated because it's true" means something very different to "it is true because it's repeated". Here's an analogy of this conversation so you can understand how stupid you sound:
> Have you considered that he might be dying because he has cancer?
>> Can't argue with that, my granddad died and he didn't have cancer.
> The fact that people can die without having cancer has no relevance on my position that this person is died of cancer. If you want to argue with the statement, produce an argument instead of an unrelated sarcastic comment.
>> So you claim that someone dying is a useful signal to determine if they have cancer, but you only apply it to people who you already believe have cancer. But it somehow isn't a useful signal once it's someone you know doesn't have cancer. How does that make any sense? Sounds like textbook confirmation bias. Should be included as a real life example in the definitions.
Can people die of cancer? Can something be repeated because it's true? Who knows.
> Learn which way the implication goes. "It is repeated because it's true" means something very different to "it is true because it's repeated"
This makes it worse, not better, for your argument.
People repeat things all time because they think something is true, like the people you mention originally who are on "your side" of the political divide. They do the exact same thing even if they were misled into it, because they just don't know.
People on the right wing also repeat things on their social media, blogs etc. because believe it to be true.
Astroturfing and bots also repeat things to make them appear true.
So saying "It's repeated coz it's true" isn't a useful signal to determine if something is true or not, like you were claiming.
You're begging the question, in the proper use of term by assuming something is true in the first place.
https://www.scribbr.com/fallacies/begging-the-question-falla...
> A "begging the question" fallacy occurs when an argument assumes the truth of its conclusion within its premises, essentially using the very thing you are trying to prove as evidence to support it, creating a circular reasoning loop where no actual proof is provided; it's like saying "This is the best product because it's superior to all others.". > Key points about begging the question fallacy: > Circular reasoning: > This fallacy is often referred to as circular reasoning because it essentially repeats the conclusion in the premise, creating a loop where no new information is added to support the argument. > Assuming the conclusion: > The key aspect is that the argument takes the point it is trying to prove as already established fact without providing any independent evidence.
You provided no proof of the original except "it's repeated coz it's true" when the other commenter requested proof rather than just seeing repetitions.
People repeat falsehoods and exaggerations all the time like you did with your original comment, so that's not evidence of anything.
Also if people have to resort to childish personal insults then they're usually suffering from a hard case of the Dunning Kruger effect and are clueless about the fallacies they're suffering from.
2 replies →