What's new
By:
Advanced search…
The Front Row Forums

Register a free account today to become a member of the world's largest Rugby League discussion forum! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Search results

  1. G

    Ye Shewen

    It means that if your appeal to Leonard as an expert was faulty. No connection there, it's just bad reasoning. Your reasoning on undetectable chemical x shifts the burden of proof to the athlete who does well instead of the person who proposes the chemical, and violates legal procedure...
  2. G

    Ye Shewen

    I noe. Obviously, I have to apply that to all countries that spam money, especially America.
  3. G

    Ye Shewen

    Oh, that's fine then. It's just that Karl's guilty until innocent thing was asking for it. Personally, I think that spamming money like that might not be in the spirit of the amateur Olympics, but it's not illegal.
  4. G

    Ye Shewen

    My bad Bretto, i thought you were Karl :P Oh well, if you base it on those criteria, I can make the rest of my argument fit you as well.
  5. G

    Ye Shewen

    Good catch, i missed that one
  6. G

    Ye Shewen

    Don't you get it? I'm calling you a bigot if your reasoning cannot be applied by you personally if your opinions are biased and you can't apply your argument for all cases that fit your criteria. I thought you'd have understood the trap by now but you just kept walking.
  7. G

    Ye Shewen

    You can, but if it's not your personal opinion and the person using this reasoning can accept one result but not the other results that follow, there are problems with that person's consistency, or with the argument. If you base on past indiscretions, and the possibility of an undetectable...
  8. G

    Ye Shewen

    Exactly, it's cos you don't know how belief and imperative logic work. Hardly PD 101. Actually, you hardly seem to know how to use basic logical systems in the first place. Go ahead and test them, if you can. Both are valid. Remember, it's inconsistent to not accept beliefs that follow...
  9. G

    Ye Shewen

    my bad, there's a better option that fulfills impartiality: Don't combine judging Ye guilty until proven innocent and not judging all impressive athletes from countries capable of creating undetectable steroids which have had doping in the past guilty until proven innocent.
  10. G

    Ye Shewen

    I knew you would claim that assumption. Yup, can't be used, you already know it's a logical fallacy when you only have one or two published experts supporting your claim. I could use the same assumption about everything. Like: An expert holds that aliens created man, there is consensus, the...
  11. G

    Ye Shewen

    or at least, the classic version
  12. G

    Ye Shewen

    True, the "simplest" is very subjective, but the no unnecessary multiplication of entities rule was the original version, and versions close to it were accepted by Newton, Russell and I think most experts It may not prove, but simply shifts the burden of proof. Karl's method wants to shift the...
  13. G

    Ye Shewen

    She's considered innocent entails she's to be considered as not doping. She's considered innocent until proven guilty means she's to be considered as not doping until proven guilty She's not proven guilty Therefore the swimmers say they consider her to not be doping. Should be valid(I think).
  14. G

    Ye Shewen

    Logical fallacy, appeal to authority. Argument from authority only works when the majority of respected swimmers, swim coaches and sports officials have that opinion, rather than a minority, like Leonard. Leonard claims consensus, but it's not on public record and so must be discounted. In...
  15. G

    Ye Shewen

    Improper use of Occam's razor. Occam's Razor means that you use known entities rather than throw in an unknown one to explain a result. In this case, if a swimmer passed the drug test, then she is either not doping, or using an undetectable drug. In this case, assumption of an undetectable...

Latest posts

Top