|
This whole "zOMG Fallacy of Relative Privation!" thing I hear a lot from feminists is borne out of purely simple bullshit just to shut down discussion and is simply there to "gaslight" (as per their terms). It's not even a rfucking real fallacy! Basically it goes like this:
Parent A tells Child A that he should eat his food because he's lucky to have the resources before him compared to when he or she (Parent A) was Child A's age. Child A in a fit of tumblr logic blurts out "Fallacy of Relative Privation!"
Seriously, it's a down-low coverup of sophistry and pure narcisitic bullshit meant to spare the rod and make one's position unassailable by any means and is the perfect argument for and by spoiled rotten immature fucks.
Think about it, If Relative Privation is a thing, then having any perspective on any given situation by gauging it with ones own experience or examples seen is in its nature fallacious and that is just not feasible for this bullshit to be a real and formal fallacy.
/soapbox
Late edit:
I hereby present the mother of all pseudo fallacies: The fallacy of ad veritum. It's an informal fallacy based on arguing from data and facts thus ignoring others' lived experience from that position.
This post has been edited by gamagaeru: May 18 2016, 00:28
|
What was the last thing you thought?, read deed by path.
Mar 23 2016, 00:30
