Comment by ivewonyoung

> 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.