Chris--
Here are two arguments against posting "informal logical fallacies" instead
of actual linguistic (theoretical and practical) work on our list. See
which you find more convincing.
a) The posting of informal logical fallacies facilitates petty
one-up-manship; it's something people (overwhelmingly white men) do instead
of real research, because it yields smugness and self-satisfaction without
responsibility--and without results. (It is also cowardly because, as we
saw with your very first example, it means you can insinuate and hint at
names instead of engaging flesh-and-blood thinkers and their actual
arguments!)
b) Informal logic, like formal logic, is simply one form of logic. But
logic is, by its very nature, an abstraction based on millenia of
historical generalization. Logic always requires some kind of mediating
system of concepts--always domain specific--before it can be applied. This
is why one kind of logic obtains in arithmetic (where differences are
always significant) and a different kind in statistics (where differences
can be insignificant). This is why we have one kind of logic in the human
sciences (where societies that look after the old, the poor, and the sick
are considered more evolved) and a different kind in biology (where the
survival of the infirm tends to devolution and extinction). As Vygotsky
said, a "Marxist psychology" would be as sterile as a Marxist mineralogy:
(Personally, I find BOTH of them convincing; I suppose that means I am
either tone-deaf or tone-unpoliced....)
dk
2024년 3월 8일 (금) 오전 6:00, Dr ChRIS CLÉiRIGh <c.cleirigh@xxxxxxxxx>님이 작성:
Dear Scholars,
Here is another informal fallacy which might prove helpful in assessing
the validity of arguments on email list discussions.
- Tone policing <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tone_policing> –
focusing on emotion behind (or resulting from) a message rather than the
message itself as a discrediting tactic.
dr chris cléirigh
*To make your children capable of honesty is the beginning of education.*
— John Ruskin
====================================
Some Of My Sites
Review of *Subjacency Duplexes* <https://subjacencyduplex.blogspot.com/>
Review of *Modelling Paralanguage Using SFS*
<https://modelling-paralanguage.blogspot.com/>
Review of *Factoring Out Structure* <https://yaegandoran.blogspot.com/>
Review of *Embodied Meaning* <https://sflparalanguage.blogspot.com/>
Review of *Lexis As Most Local Context*
<https://lexisasmostlocalcontext.blogspot.com/>
Review of *Axial Relations* <https://axial-relations.blogspot.com/>
Review of* A Theory of Syntax for Systemic Functional Linguistics*
<http://cardiff-grammar.blogspot.com.au/>
Review of *Deploying Functional Grammar*
<https://deployingfunctionalgrammar.blogspot.com/>
Review of *Working With Discourse*
<http://workingwithdiscourse.blogspot.com.au/>
Review of Bateman's Review of *English Text*
<http://master-bateman.blogspot.com.au/>
Review of *Lexicogrammatical Cartography*
<https://lexicogrammaticalcartography.blogspot.com/>
Review of *English Text* <http://discourse-semantics.blogspot.com.au/>
Learning From Mistakes
<http://thoughts-that-cross-my-mind.blogspot.com.au/>
Primate Dominance Strategies <https://attitude-in-sfl.blogspot.com/>
The Culture of the SFL Community
<https://whatliesbeneathsfl.blogspot.com/>
SFL Theory <http://systemictheory.blogspot.com/>
Sample SFL Analyses <http://sys-func.blogspot.com.au/>
Answers to Analysis Questions on Email Lists
<http://sysfling.blogspot.com.au/>
General SFL Matters <http://thethoughtoccurs.blogspot.com.au/>
Intellectual Applications of SFL Theory
<http://informingthoughts.blogspot.com.au/>
Conclusions from Intellectual Applications of SFL Theory
<https://meta-sfl-theory.blogspot.com/>
The Opposite of Social Media <https://mental-projection.blogspot.com/>
====================================
