On Oct 17, 2011, at 3:52 PM, david buchanan wrote:
> I mean, haven't you ever heard about being comfortably numb or out of touch
> with your own feelings or being oblivious to clues or people who can't take a
> hint? People are blind, insensitive and oblivious in a million different
> ways. Haven't you ever heard about the tragedy of living in the past or
> living for some future goal, as opposed to being in the moment? How do you
> figure DQ has some built-in guarantee about it? Just like all these other
> common complaints, to say one is out of touch with DQ is to say we should be
> more sensitive and more responsive to experience as it's felt and lived
> through, as
> opposed to our thoughts about and interpretations of experience.
Isn't this a version of the “Everybody knows” fallacy?
AKA every schoolboy knows, sweeping generalisation, faulty generalisation,
dicto simpliciter, universal rule, maxim without qualification, stereotyping
The everybody knows fallacy is used to make an assumption that a premise is
taken as a given, and that there are no justified and acceptable exceptions.
___
Moq_Discuss mailing list
Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
Archives:
http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
http://moq.org/md/archives.html
