Quote about the use of faulty arguments to defend a cause



Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The problem with India Against Corruption (www.indiaagainstcorruption.org)

So, It's happening in the same manner in which it should be envisaged by a low IQ nation as India. The crusade of India Against Corruption   has turned into a personal war between Five-off-Five!  The one batch of five being that from the government and the another five from another organisation calling themselves 'India against corruption' working under the umbrella of an organisation called Civil Society group. I dislike this and I dislike it more when i see Indians time and again falling into the trap of proving "who is honest"! U see, first they put the blame on Sharad Pawar, and now the blame is on Shashi Bhushan, who is trying to prove that he is not dishonest. And slowly the crusade is hijacked away into a personal battle to prove whether person X is honest or not.!!? Isn't it funny that we the nation of 1.2 billion people have failed to figure out where exactly does this dishonest and it's hypocrisy lies!! We think it is in those 543, the parliame...
Read more

Semantics and the mental aptitude in the matters of law

It is in accordance with the flow of logic, the principles of natural justice and in all the democractic laws that the one who is presenting a claim has also to bear the burden to prove that claim. But there is a catch in this. Catch is that in our day today discourse, by a semantic turn of the statement- the language and the grammar- a 'claim' can be made to appear like a mere doubt, a suspicion or even simpler - a trivial cross-examination. The effect of this 'twisting' by usage of the Linguistic is that the 'burden of proof' appears shifted , away from the one who maybe challenging an evidence while appearing to be merely a doubting Thomas, or a cross-examining lawyer. In the field of Journalism, the news-men apply this effect of converting what may be an solemn legally valid evidence, into a 'claim' or an 'accusation', by presenting that news matter in the form of a doubt, or a suspicion. This, they can do under the cover of another valid...
Read more

the Dualism world

Moral dualism simply implies that there are two moral opposites at work, independent of any interpretation of what might be "moral" and - unlike ditheism/bitheism - independent of how these may be represented -- Wikipedia source on 'Dualism'. Hypocrisy is an unconscious self-contradiction: a state of incongruence between one's professed beliefs and feelings and one's actual beliefs and feelings, or an application of a criticism to others that one does not apply to oneself. Hypocrisy is not simply a lie, saying something which one knows to be false. Neither is it simply failing to practice those virtues that one preaches -- Wikipedia source on 'Hypocrisy'. Let's see how many of us can get these :- It is possible for two statements to be correct at one time It is possible for two mutually conflicting statements to be correct at the same time. It is possible for two mutually conflicting statements to be correct at the same time and yet be d...
Read more