@[email protected] @[email protected] @[email protected] @[email protected] @[email protected] @[email protected] @[email protected] Lol so you used a puppet account to intentionally act in bad faith and take a quote out of context? Wtf is wrong with you?

@[email protected] @[email protected] @[email protected] @[email protected] @[email protected] @[email protected] You mean Khalidi? Have you even read the text? Said is not a historian and Pappe does not come to the same conclusions.

@[email protected] @[email protected] @[email protected] @[email protected] @[email protected] @[email protected] @[email protected] @[email protected] Did you read the next sentence? “Similarly, when there is controversy, and authorities are divided, it is an error to base one’s view on the authority of just some of them”

@[email protected] @[email protected] @[email protected] @[email protected] @[email protected] @[email protected] @[email protected] @[email protected] @[email protected] I don’t have time to waste with trolls. Educate yourself

@[email protected] @[email protected] @[email protected] @[email protected] @[email protected] @[email protected] @[email protected] @[email protected] @[email protected] https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/fallacies/index.html

@[email protected] @[email protected] @[email protected] @[email protected] @[email protected] @[email protected] @[email protected] @[email protected] @[email protected] It is clear you don’t understand how logical fallacies work. I implore you to read about them.

@[email protected] @[email protected] @[email protected] @[email protected] @[email protected] @[email protected] @[email protected] @[email protected] You are so obviously wrong. I am embarrassed for you.

@[email protected] @[email protected] @[email protected] @[email protected] @[email protected] @[email protected] @[email protected] @[email protected] Yes - these logical fallacies do obviously apply here.

@[email protected] @[email protected] @[email protected] @[email protected] @[email protected] @[email protected] @[email protected] @[email protected] “An argument from authority, also called an appeal to authority, or argumentum ad verecundiam, is a form of argument in which the opinion of an influential figure is used as evidence to support an argument.

All sources agree this is not a valid form of logical proof, that is to say, that this is a logical fallacy”

@[email protected] @[email protected] @[email protected] @[email protected] @[email protected] @[email protected] @[email protected] @[email protected] ‘appeal to accomplishment (also known as appeal to success) is a logical fallacy that occurs when an argument is defended from criticism based upon the level of accomplishment of the individual making the argument’

@[email protected] @[email protected] @[email protected] @[email protected] @[email protected] @[email protected] @[email protected] My point is they don’t address the actual arguement. They address the person making it. It’s also an appeal to accomplishment. By addressing the context and not the point the person is engaging in sophistry and not dialogue focused on understanding the truth. Logical fallacies are tools to understand when someone is hijacking our emotions

@[email protected] @[email protected] @[email protected] @[email protected] @[email protected] Isn’t an appeal to academic credentials an Argumentum ad populum logical fallacy and inherently classist?