|
Post by major01 on Jun 26, 2012 0:08:21 GMT -5
This one is known as the Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc Logical Fallacy. It is to say, simply, that "X was the RESULT, therefore Y MUST have been the cause!"; It is NOT A VALID ARGUMENT. I think you're confused. The post hoc fallacy states that the sequential ordering of events cannot be the sole argument for causation. What you've described here is simply inductive reasoning, and it's validity depends entirely on the premises X and Y. If I argue that your disdain towards WC likely stems from poor quality instruction, that's not a fallacy. It's an assumption which may or may not be any good depending on the information I've been given. If, however, I then use that assumption as a basis for rejecting your arguments against the utility of WC, without considering the arguments themselves, that would be an Ad Hom fallacy.
|
|
|
Post by Glutton4Punishment on Jun 26, 2012 3:07:59 GMT -5
Point taken! I'm not a pro on those, but I remember a decent number from high school.
|
|
Chef Samurai
Global Moderator
Canadian Catch Wrestling
Posts: 843
|
Post by Chef Samurai on Jun 26, 2012 15:18:16 GMT -5
good stuff major!
|
|
|
Post by the tank on Jun 26, 2012 15:28:12 GMT -5
This one is known as the Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc Logical Fallacy. It is to say, simply, that "X was the RESULT, therefore Y MUST have been the cause!"; It is NOT A VALID ARGUMENT. I think you're confused. The post hoc fallacy states that the sequential ordering of events cannot be the sole argument for causation. What you've described here is simply inductive reasoning, and it's validity depends entirely on the premises X and Y. If I argue that your disdain towards WC likely stems from poor quality instruction, that's not a fallacy. It's an assumption which may or may not be any good depending on the information I've been given. If, however, I then use that assumption as a basis for rejecting your arguments against the utility of WC, without considering the arguments themselves, that would be an Ad Hom fallacy. I am hiring you as my attorney.
|
|
|
Post by Glutton4Punishment on Jun 26, 2012 15:48:00 GMT -5
Another tip to all: If you don't want to look like an idiot, get your logical fallacies straight! Don't do what I did.
Although I totally did that on purpose. I was just testing you guys to see if you'd catch the mistake.
|
|
odee
Global Moderator
Kyokushin 10 years - Brazilian Jujitsu 3 years - Muay Thai 2 years.
Posts: 1,286
|
Post by odee on Jun 26, 2012 17:43:14 GMT -5
Funny, we never learned the different types of fallicy in school. Managed to go twenty five years without even hearing about it and I've been known to be a pretty frequent victim of EPIC FAIL.
|
|
|
Post by Glutton4Punishment on Jun 27, 2012 11:00:45 GMT -5
That's because you're a silly Australian.
|
|
talon
Yellow Belt
Posts: 65
|
Post by talon on Jul 3, 2012 5:32:18 GMT -5
How not to sound like an idiot: don't be Australian or open your mouth or start this post LOL
|
|
odee
Global Moderator
Kyokushin 10 years - Brazilian Jujitsu 3 years - Muay Thai 2 years.
Posts: 1,286
|
Post by odee on Jul 3, 2012 23:37:38 GMT -5
Funny Talon. But now that you're one of the peanut gallery with us you might want to contribute something useful. After all, you should know all about sounding like an idiot.
|
|
|
Post by judomofo on Jul 9, 2012 12:24:52 GMT -5
"This art has been around for hundreds of years, so they must be doing something right"...
|
|
|
Post by judomofo on Jul 9, 2012 12:26:07 GMT -5
"Shihan So and So took all the best from Martial Arts X, Y, Z, and combined them to make SoandSodo, one of the first MMAs"
|
|
odee
Global Moderator
Kyokushin 10 years - Brazilian Jujitsu 3 years - Muay Thai 2 years.
Posts: 1,286
|
Post by odee on Jul 11, 2012 2:03:25 GMT -5
"This art has been around for hundreds of years, so they must be doing something right"... I'd agree with that on a partial level judomofo. There's usually nothing wrong with the techniques those practitioners are talking about, they have been around for hundreds of years because they work. The problem usually lies in the ability of the person making that statement. Mas Oyama was well versed in Judo, Aiki-Jujutsu, eighteen hands kempo and two schools of Karate but there is one thing he said that really bothered me and that was to point out that throwers have a disadvantage in a fight as clinching and redirecting is a slower method than striking, meaning a striker would get in first. All fine and dandy for Oyama the fourth dan Judoka to point that out, he's packing over a decade of throwing knowhow meaning he probably identified throws before a practitioner had even initiated them. Would someone who has only done Karate or a proper striker like a Boxer be able to read movements and possible outcomes of a thrower like that? Obvious answer is no. I'm not going to recognise the lead-ups for most Judo throws, I've never done Judo, the best I could hope for is to act under judgement and hope that I judged right.
|
|
|
Post by judomofo on Jul 16, 2012 12:44:10 GMT -5
"This art has been around for hundreds of years, so they must be doing something right"... I'd agree with that on a partial level judomofo. There's usually nothing wrong with the techniques those practitioners are talking about, they have been around for hundreds of years because they work. The problem usually lies in the ability of the person making that statement. Mas Oyama was well versed in Judo, Aiki-Jujutsu, eighteen hands kempo and two schools of Karate but there is one thing he said that really bothered me and that was to point out that throwers have a disadvantage in a fight as clinching and redirecting is a slower method than striking, meaning a striker would get in first. All fine and dandy for Oyama the fourth dan Judoka to point that out, he's packing over a decade of throwing knowhow meaning he probably identified throws before a practitioner had even initiated them. Would someone who has only done Karate or a proper striker like a Boxer be able to read movements and possible outcomes of a thrower like that? Obvious answer is no. I'm not going to recognise the lead-ups for most Judo throws, I've never done Judo, the best I could hope for is to act under judgement and hope that I judged right. I completely disagree with it on many levels. For one, like everything else, crime, unarmed combat, and self defense have changed, they have evolved. Many moves in Aikido are still done with a sword wielding opponent in mind, most techniques of Jujuutsu are derived from the mental aspect that both you and your opponent are in armor. While all arts share many things in common, because the human anatomy is the same.. (i.e. punch, kick, pressure on joint opposite way it is intended to work), to argue that something that has worked for hundreds of years must be good... is especially weak regarding something that never evolved. Nor is there any evidence that particular things still work now, much less over the last 50 or 60 years. Are they doing Kenjutsu in Afghanistan right now to defeat Taliban? Jujutsu is a war time Martial Art, how much of it do you think is being used in Syria? Let's say you sent 5,000 black belts in Jujutsu into the front lines of any of the conflicts going on in the world.. would they make a difference, would those hundred year old techniques "work" in a war zone? No, combat has changed, dramatically. They would be cut down from mortar fire and automatic weapons within seconds. Similarly the rules of society of have changed, our modes of transportation have changed, we aren't walking tens of miles to get to the nearest village and having to worry about being robbed along the way. Society, the threats to a person, combat, all have changed, all have evolved, advancements in training methodologies, understanding of sports fitness, all have changed, failure to evolve doesn't mean success, and never has in this world. A hundred years ago they were using leeches to bleed people in an attempt to balance out the humors.Hundreds of years ago, if you had a stomach bug it was due to evil spirits. If you had epilepsy you were possessed by demons. Would you want the medical practices of "hundreds" of years ago being used to treat you now a days? The argument rings hollow to me, in order for an art to be applicable it has to evolve with the times, while certain techniques may remain universal, some just aren't realistic. NOw, if you tell me you study these things for cultural purpose, historical purpose or enjoyment or anything of that nature, hey makes sense to me, good for you. But if you are studying it because you think a pedigree lineage of the same techniques from hundreds of years some how means it is more effective, then I feel you have a weak argument to the practicality of modern day self defense. Just my two cents.
|
|
odee
Global Moderator
Kyokushin 10 years - Brazilian Jujitsu 3 years - Muay Thai 2 years.
Posts: 1,286
|
Post by odee on Jul 17, 2012 8:24:42 GMT -5
A lot of blood and tissue specialists are going back to the leach and maggot methods because they work, they lost popularity because people freak out at the idea of letting something eat them but those methods actually do work, they're also studying other old cures like vampire bat saliva, and leach and mosqito injections to try and synthasise them for their anti-coagulant properties.
Aikido was made after the battlefield that they rave on about had vanished so I rarely take their claims to heart. But seriously I'm talking about the methods for cracking skulls, warzone weapons have changed but face to face confrontations still occur on and off the battlefield. Those methods still work after hundreds of years because the skull design honestly hasn't changed that much since Feudal Japan or Medieval Europe. Same is true for the rest of the human skeleton. In any confrontation that involves two people hitting each other with their body parts or even with broomsticks or empty rifles the techniques for Jujitsu, Aikido, Chinese Kenpos and other old martial arts still do the job because the job remains the same. I doubt the PEOPLE who say that the moves don't need to be tested, the moves need to be tested by every single person who learns them otherwise you wind up with people who know and can't do. I know people would argue that throwing rocks at others is a dated exercise but I can guarantee if the opportunity presents itself I can break a small kangaroo with a rock and I can also bust a person's skull, neck, jaw or ribs by throwing that same rock no matter what they're armed or armoured with. It can be pointed out that I couldn't knock over a tank with that rock but I couldn't knock over a tank with an M16 either, nor would I consider a guy in a tank an opportunity, a guy sticking his head out of the tank on the other hand I might still take a crack at with either the rock or the rifle.
|
|
|
Post by yaoshuya on Jul 27, 2012 16:04:28 GMT -5
Muhammed ali a great boxer jumped into a wrestling match with a wrestler
|
|