What's your (least) favorite logical fallacy?

[Eleas]

<snip post, reposting in the Gun Thread>

[His Divine Shadow]

Come on. We all have that one logical fallacy which just pisses us off more than the others.

For me it's straw-men

What's the one that pisses you off the most?

Everyone I can detect?

[beyond hope]

I get this one all the time where I work (animal control): "I want to make a complaint about my neighbor's dog, it's a pit bull. Even though it's done nothing to indicate it's a danger, it's common knowledge that pit bulls are dangerous dogs and I want it taken and put to sleep." It's the Hasty Generalization, usually together with the Slippery Slope ("It's going to tear my throat out if something's not done!") Of the two of them I'd have to say the Slippery Slope annoys me more.

The other one that bugs me technically isn't a fallacy: it's good ol' outright lying. I get that all day long at work, too: people will tell us whatever they think will work to either cause trouble for a neighbor they dislike or else to weasel out of trouble they legitimately deserve.

[Shadow WarChief]

I've changed my mind. My new least favorite fallacy is

"It's not his fault. The writers made him do it. In reality he's much smarter"

I've just had to reply to 8 pages worth of this shit on another site, and my brain is fucking fried because of it...

[Darth Wong]

The hasty generalization is employed not only by racists and religious bigots, but also by MBA's.

How, you say? Think about it: what do automotive manufacturing, pharmaceuticals, corporate law, plastics processing, die casting, and computers have in common? Not a whole lot. But take an MBA "business executive" from any one of those businesses and plop him into any other one of those businesses, and he will insist that he knows what he's doing. This is not hypothesis; MBA's do this all the time. "Generalist" managers move from one company to another (often in completely different industries) and are paid huge sums of money because it is assumed that if the previous company did well under his command ("false cause" fallacy), then any company should do well under his command ("hasty generalization").

[Darth Wong]

The population there is very divided; on the one hand you have the fundies (often Mennonites, since rural Manitoba is overflowing with them) and on the other you have cynical, marginally rational assholes such as myself.

The Mennonite community is a suffocating environment of forced conformism. People used to get shunned from the community (literally, given the complete silent treatment where everyone in the entire town looks past you as if you don't exist) for wearing their hair wrong (I'm not making this up). I know; that community came down upon me once, for trying to take one of their daughters away.

But the story has a happy ending. They lost. She eventually rejected their faith. And even though they don't like it, I get to bang her every night. So there

[Nick]

Probably, although some guy from Queensland (who'd gotten a degree in Geology of all things) was round here earlier discussing creationism and how much better it was than evolution.

Heh, if you want to find out about Qld fundies, get hold of the book "Telling Lies For God" by a guy whose name I can't recall. (goes to check Google: ahh, Ian Plimer).

As for the logical fallacies that annoy me the most. . . hmm.

Slippery slopes are definitely high on the list (simply because they show up so often in debates about _laws_ - which can have a real and immediate impact on everybody - as opposed to more abstract philosophy).

I think it's more the way the fallacy is being used - if it is being used by the ignorant to persaude the gullible, then it really pisses me off. If, on the other hand, it is being used by the knowledgeable to persuade the gullible, I'm less likely to be annoyed. . .

Ah, so that indicates the one that _really_ pisses me off is when someone sets out to deliberately exploit the fact that most people will fall victim to the 'style-over-substance' fallacy - and their argument is all style, with little or no substance behind it.

[Mr Bean]

The Mennonite community is a suffocating environment of forced conformism. People used to get shunned from the community (literally, given the complete silent treatment where everyone in the entire town looks past you as if you don't exist) for wearing their hair wrong (I'm not making this up). I know; that community came down upon me once, for trying to take one of their daughters away.

Do they ignore you not matter what you do? Cause I was thinking free shoping spree and well

[C.S.Strowbridge]

The fallacy I hate the most is Style over Substance. Just cause I swear at you doesn't mean you won the argument. If I say your arguemnts are wrong cause you are an idiot, then it's an Ad Hominem Attack. However, if I say you are an idiot cause your arguments are wrong, then it's just an insult. Deal with it. But don't run away claiming victory.

[Lagmonster]

I'll go with Style over Substance as well. It is the most likely one to end in Ancien Ninja Fist-To-Nuts style being unleashed.

Although, the whole topic is kind of interesting from a certain point of view. It's like asking me how I'd least like to be shot in the head:

"Well, I prefer the up-the-nose method, but wouldn't be too happy about back-of-the-temple or in the eye either. Definately hate those more than under-the-chin, though."

[Eleas]

The fallacy I hate the most is Style over Substance. Just cause I swear at you doesn't mean you won the argument. If I say your arguemnts are wrong cause you are an idiot, then it's an Ad Hominem Attack. However, if I say you are an idiot cause your arguments are wrong, then it's just an insult. Deal with it. But don't run away claiming victory.

Life is hard for the etiquette impaired, right? =)

[Tebrak'aun]

The one that always gets me irritated is the casual use of an absolute to justify an unwillingness to make sacrifice or for apathetic behaviour. You know the old "I would like to live a more environmentally friendly life but I can't do without my car" Sure you could we did for the hundreds of thousands of years before the industrial age but gee doesn't it feel better to deal in absolutes it means you do not have to waste your mental faculties examining whether or not you did the morally right thing... you had no choice.
Free Will the illusion is so much nicer than the reality
By the way I am not a radical greenie too lazy can't live without my car
its just a very common example so I thought I would use it