this post was submitted on 11 Jun 2024
118 points (92.8% liked)

No Stupid Questions

35819 readers
1087 users here now

No such thing. Ask away!

!nostupidquestions is a community dedicated to being helpful and answering each others' questions on various topics.

The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:

Rules (interactive)


Rule 1- All posts must be legitimate questions. All post titles must include a question.

All posts must be legitimate questions, and all post titles must include a question. Questions that are joke or trolling questions, memes, song lyrics as title, etc. are not allowed here. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.



Rule 2- Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.

Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.



Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.

Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.



Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.

That's it.



Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.

Questions which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.



Rule 6- Regarding META posts and joke questions.

Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-question posts using the [META] tag on your post title.

On fridays, you are allowed to post meme and troll questions, on the condition that it's in text format only, and conforms with our other rules. These posts MUST include the [NSQ Friday] tag in their title.

If you post a serious question on friday and are looking only for legitimate answers, then please include the [Serious] tag on your post. Irrelevant replies will then be removed by moderators.



Rule 7- You can't intentionally annoy, mock, or harass other members.

If you intentionally annoy, mock, harass, or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.

Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.



Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.



Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.

Let everyone have their own content.



Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here.



Credits

Our breathtaking icon was bestowed upon us by @Cevilia!

The greatest banner of all time: by @TheOneWithTheHair!

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] EleventhHour -5 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (2 children)

Nope, as I explained in my other comment, it’s standard usage.

you explained more or less what i did, except the whole “using the grammar and spelling of a 3 year-old is valid because language is fluid!” BS argument i outright reject--

and your claims of being an English teacher? it bears no weight here.

Argument from authority

An argument from authority (argumentum ab auctoritate), 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.[1]

The argument from authority is a logical fallacy,[2] and obtaining knowledge in this way is fallible.[3][4]

so, this comment...

In English, we often use the definite article when speaking in general about a specific activity or action that involves a non-specific object. E.g. “go to the bathroom” or “catch the bus”, or “read the newspaper”. It’s not poor form at all.

and if you can't comprehend that this is simply another way of explaining what i did, then i certainly question your claims of being an English teacher.

[–] kabe 4 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

Lol well teaching this professionally surely makes me some form of authority (albeit of course not the authority!) on this subject.

To clarify, your original point sounded like you were making a distinction between metaphorical mirrors and actual mirrors:

"in the mirror" tends to more often refer to a metaphorical "mirror", typically when discussing self-reflection

  • "I took a look in the mirror and decided to change my ways."

"in a mirror" tends to refer most often to actual mirrors that exist in reality, not metaphorically

  • "I looked into a mirror to fix my eyeliner."

This incorrect distinction is what I was objecting to, because of course we can use both the indefinite and definite articles to refer to either literal or figurative mirrors.

[–] Nibodhika 3 points 5 months ago (1 children)

That's a common mistake, an argument from authority is only a fallacy if the person is not an authority in the field. Quoting Neil deGrasse Tyson on political views is an argument from authority, quoting him on astrophysics is not.

[–] EleventhHour -1 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (2 children)

Wrong. Authority is not what makes an argument correct— facts are. And those exist regardless of any claimed authority— therefore, to argue that one’s authority makes them correct is a fallacy, for it is facts and evidence, not authority, from which truth is derived.

If Neil Degrasse Tyson said something that’s incorrect and then claimed he was correct simply because he was a physicist does not make him correct.

Thanks for playing!

[–] Nibodhika 3 points 5 months ago (1 children)

The thing is that facts are not as clear cut as you think, that's a very childish vision of the world (to think that it is always possible to differentiate a fact, don't believe me? What am I wearing now? There is a factual answer, but you have no way of knowing it)

Plus if Neil deGrasse Tyson claims something about astrophysics and you claim he's wrong, you better have at least someone as knowledgeable as him in astrophysics to back that claim, otherwise I'm siding with the expert on the matter.

Plus all discussions rely on the backing of experts, otherwise any discussion is impossible, I could just claim your argument is wrong because some word you used means the opposite of what you meant, your only counter argument would be to point to a dictionary, which is by your own definition an appeal to authority fallacy.

[–] EleventhHour -1 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

Now you’re equivocating and using personal insults.

And there were “experts” who said that COVID vaccine causes autism.

Facts make one correct. Not authority.

[–] Nibodhika 3 points 5 months ago

I'm not insulting you, but thinking that facts are always knowledgeable is a childish vision of the world.

You put quotes around expert because you know they weren't, actual experts were saying vaccines did not cause autism. Let me ask you then, how do YOU know that vaccines don't cause autism? Because to me the answer is simple, I've listened to the consensus of the experts, but to you that's a fallacy.

Facts are not always knowledgeable, authority in a field gives one credibility over the facts they claim.

[–] morriscox 1 points 5 months ago

I have had people hand me a floppy disk and want me to download the Internet onto it. I have told them that that is impossible but how do they know that I'm telling them the truth?