Hm. My example is simply an argument that I do NOT think succumbs to that fallacy. Einstein is a reliable, but not completely unchallengeable, authority. And if he is challenged, we can dig into the theory to find our own reasoning.
I'm curious if you believe all argument/reasoning can be *accurately* formalized? Worse yet, do you believe that all argument can be reduced to deduction? On 10/03/2017 05:13 PM, Nick Thompson wrote: > Aren't you missing a premise, if you are seeking a valid deductive argument? > > What connects Albert's thought with your conclusion? -- ☣ gⅼеɳ ============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove
