42 Matching Annotations
  1. Mar 2021
  2. Feb 2021
    1. ReconfigBehSci. (2021, February 1). Great list, but I think one of the main problems with “absence of evidence fallacy” is its phrasing: “absence of evid. Is not the same as evidence of absence” is a true statement, “absence of evidence is not evidence of absence” is literally false @richarddmorey [Tweet]. @SciBeh. https://twitter.com/SciBeh/status/1356172673651503104

    1. (6) ReconfigBehSci on Twitter: “@MichaelPaulEdw1 @islaut1 @ToddHorowitz3 @richarddmorey @MaartenvSmeden and not just misguided (as too simplistic) but part of the problem....” / Twitter. (n.d.). Retrieved February 24, 2021, from https://twitter.com/SciBeh/status/1356528429211021319

    1. ReconfigBehSci. (2021, February 2). @MichaelPaulEdw1 @islaut1 @ToddHorowitz3 @richarddmorey as this account is focussed on COVID, maybe time to move the discussion elsewhere- happy to discuss further if you want to get in touch by email—U.hahn" "https://t.co/HOGwHragEb [Tweet]. @SciBeh. https://twitter.com/SciBeh/status/1356529368630239232

    1. ReconfigBehSci. (2021, February 2). @MichaelPaulEdw1 @islaut1 @ToddHorowitz3 @richarddmorey @MaartenvSmeden as I just said to @islaut1 if you want to force the logical contradiction you move away entirely from all of the interesting cases of inference from absence in everyday life, including the interesting statistical cases of, for example, null findings—So I think we now agree? [Tweet]. @SciBeh. https://twitter.com/SciBeh/status/1356530759016792064

    1. ReconfigBehSci. (2021, February 1). @MaartenvSmeden @richarddmorey you absolutely did (and I would have been disappointed if you hadn’t ;-)! It was a general comment prompted by the fact that the title of the article you linked to doesn’t (as is widespread), and I actually genuinely think this is part of the “problem” in pedagogical terms. 1/2 [Tweet]. @SciBeh. https://twitter.com/SciBeh/status/1356227423067664384

    1. The Last Crusidual. (2021, February 2). @SciBeh @MichaelPaulEdw1 @ToddHorowitz3 @richarddmorey you can’t have any form of evidence. If you concider any form of evidence, than what is talked about than isn’t anymore what the falacy sais. [Tweet]. @islaut1. https://twitter.com/islaut1/status/1356529266519924736

  3. Dec 2020
  4. Nov 2020
    1. I'm still calling this v1.00 as this is what will be included in the first print run.

      There seems to be an artificial pressure and a false assumption that the version that gets printed and included in the box be the "magic number" 1.00.

      But I think there is absolutely nothing bad or to be ashamed of to have the version number printed in the rule book be 1.47 or even 2.0. (Or, of course, you could just not print it at all.) It's just being transparent/honest about how many versions/revisions you've made. 

  5. Oct 2020
  6. Sep 2020
    1. But because it is espoused by so many leading members of the JavaScript community, scrutiny is all too rarely applied.
    2. It’s written by Sindre Sorhus, whose npm profile is enough to make all but the most prolific developer feel wholly inadequate, and so carries with it a degree of authority.
  7. Aug 2020
  8. May 2020
  9. Apr 2020
    1. Despite their awarded diplomas in the art of writing, you'd be surprised at how many editors and journalists in the United States make English mistakes. For instance, "an" is still often coupled with words that begin with an "H" sound, even though this is improper. I'd advise against treating material from news sources as if it were error-free or even a higher authority on grammar.
  10. Mar 2020
  11. Jan 2019
  12. Mar 2018
    1. argument from authority (e.g., President Richard Nixon should be re-elected because he has a secret plan to end the war in Southeast Asia — but because it was secret, there was no way for the electorate to evaluate it on its merits; the argument amounted to trusting him because he was President: a mistake, as it turned out)

      Everytime I hear Trump say "trust me", I think of this.

  13. Sep 2016
    1. Over the years the NCAA has changed rules that do not always align with pure amateurism. According to Zimbalist, in 1973 the NCAA altered scholarship terms so that they needed to be renewed each year.[6] This would imply that no athletes position was safe, a notion that does not fit with the love of the game

      implying an athletes position is not safe does not correlate with loving the game

  14. Feb 2016
    1. The Democrats wanted to keep the issue alive to use it as a wedge against the Republicans and to establish themselves as owners of the Hispanic vote.

      This seems hackish. It seems to me the Democrats have a very clear solution to this issue and would love to put it to rest. The Republicans, however, won't allow it.

  15. Nov 2013
    1. For all that, Quintilian continues and main-tains his own opinion that since dialectic is a virtue, so therefore is rhetoric. Quintilian should turn the whole thing around and should more correctly conclude that since dialectic is not a moral virtue which can shape a good man, so neither is rhetoric.

      Dictating opinion? Hmmm, okay. By definition, opinion is grounded in personal anecdote and perception. This follows the same kind of logic. "He says that X = Y and therefore so does Z. But no! X=Y so W=Z." This is the overall issue with syllogisms: making inferences. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't.

  16. Sep 2013
    1. For if I have had the affection of men who have received rewards in recognition of excellence, but have nothing in common with the sycophant, then how, in all reason, could you judge me to be a corrupter of youth?

      Logically flawed.

    2. in a word, it smothers truth, and pouring false ideas into our ears, it leaves no man among our citizens secure from an unjust death

      Slippery slope fallacy. Motivating by fear

    3. Indeed no one may rely on the honesty of his life as a guarantee that he will be able to live securely in Athens; for the men who have chosen to neglect what is their own and to plot against what belongs to others do not keep their hands off citizens who live soberly and bring before you only those who do evil; on the contrary, they advertise their powers in their attacks upon men who are entirely innocent, and so get more money from those who are clearly guilty.

      I know this is going somewhere, Boyle. So please don't take this as a comment like hating repetition. Okay, we good? Good. So far this entire reading is nothing but Tu Quoque. I am sure Isocrates is going to eventually explain himself, but this is all the logical fallacy of using critique to critique. Don't yell at me!

    4. For this informer, himself delivering a composed speech, has said more in complaint of my compositions than upon all other points

      argumentum ad hominem