***** Rhetoric (without the "h", my bad) is the art of the argument, navigation of discourse. It originated as a branch of the philosophy of language and has developed into an analytical field of studies. Usually philosophy comes in where natural sciences fail.
@@gtlinus was just talking about this quote the other day when watching an Albert Bandura video. This quote can sum up so much of the worlds history, as well as the dangers of the future.
Time Stamps for everybody! :) Bandwagon(1st) = 4:48 False Cause(2nd) = 6:30 Black or White(3rd) = 7:24 Loaded Question(4th) = 8:13 Anecdotal(5th) = 9:04 Fallacy(6th) = 10:33 Straw Man(7th) = 11:57 Appeal to emotion(8th) = 14:59 Black or white (9th) = 17:00 Composition(10th) = 17:43 Common Sense (11th) = 19:18 Black and white (12th) = 19:40 Personal (13th) = 20:15
@@stevenlight5006 I would have liked Bernie Sanders, but I would be happy with Sheldon Whitehouse, Katie Porter, Adam Schiff, John Fetterman, Cory Booker, or Michelle Obama, to name but a few. But, let's be clear about this; I would rather elect a lung oyster than see Tre45on return to the Whitehouse.
@@stevenlight5006 bernie sanders is the obvious pick, neither trump nor biden has a clue. people on the left having to pick biden is the biggest political upset in US history
What say now in 2023 I have all the Proof that Trump is for real,as far back as the early 90s,he was asked to run by the Military who knew America was being destroyed from the inside out by Obama Clinton China and the Deep State,Trump didn't plan to become President he was ready to retire,and if he spoke in riddles it was deliberate he wanted the enemy to think he wasn't fit to run as President. Trump is a true Patriot he has more than proved that he was the best person to save the US and the world,President Trump has fulfilled every promise he made and much more,despite over a dozen assassination attempts and false claims made against him he never quit,when this movie is finally over there will be a hell of lot of shocked and demented Trump haters,Trump really is the King of all Kings.
Because an educated population would see through this grade school form of argument. We would stop electing liars. We would stop buying products and services from abusive, greedy organizations. We would stop watching TV News and demand actual investigative journalism. We would evolve into the great society we were meant to be: Liberty, Justice, Fair Play, and Fair Pay for All.
I love to find when other people understand the immense power of language, the use of certain logical fallacies and exploitation of ignorance. I fully believe that these concepts are the entire foundation for how society has gotten to the point of the masses regularly voting away their own power and against their own material interests for people who quite regularly blatantly display their own disregard for the will of the voter in favor of their own ideological and material gains.
@@tedpeters9699 thank you, sir. We have to be able to coherently relay the need to start thinking for ourselves and push back against this now long running issue of people being unwilling to challenge the ideas and narratives given to us by institutions who have proven time and again that their first, second and third interest is in protecting the ruling class and the ideology that keeps them in power and the masses docile. For profit media outlets owned by the literal ruling elites with a financial interest, it is also in their higher interest to tell things in a way that protect their material interests and we will never hear voices that actually show the working masses that we have to demand a different way. They will cloak their narrative in rhetoric and vocabulary that tug at our heart strings and those virtues which we have been raised to hold most dear. The first way we start to move on is by recognizing that the same things always crash the economy - deregulation coupled with tax cuts. Those who have been going along with these actions without screaming at the top of their lungs, have to be removed from power, and we have to start talking and learning about the ways that do the opposite - stop funneling money straight to the top. Even if we have to use government to do so because right now it is the only tool we have, and start building locally from the ground up to take back the tools of direct action, labor strikes and civil disobedience.
@@teekanne15 What shocks me is that there are still some people, few but some, that hang on this man's every word like he is God. Oh, wait a minute.....
Watching this seven years later it is still stunning! Trump used logical fallacies in every sentence - sometimes more than one per sentence! Thank you for dissecting Trump’s speech and showing how fallacious he is!
@@pimpkramer441 Yes every politician uses all kinds of logical fallacies all the time but Trump was, and still is, THE unrivaled king of "bandwagon" and "ad hominem" fallacies. Almost everything he says publicly can be boiled down to a) how popular he is (crowd size, ratings, donations, poll numbers etc.) and b) how evil and corrupt his perceived "enemies" are.
It's not Trump who is fallacious, it's all the people in Washington who are trying to destroy the country with their globalist, one world goveenment agenda. Trump 2024!
I enjoy the academic analysis too...but it doesn't make the man wrong about a single thing. Fentanyl and trafficked humans pour in through our southern border, not engineers and doctors. The US does participate in atrocious trade deals that put America last.
@@EtTubeBruTube LOL. The arguments he puts forth are fallacious - the conclusions do not follow from the premises. You just like them because you agree with them, not because they're true.
Using Trump as an example is also advantageous because he Amplifies these traits . All politicians , indeed most people, are guilty of wallowing in logical fallacies to be sure , but no one is as brash and grandiose as Trump.
US went on life support June 1 when the Fascist turned chemicals & rubber bullets on peaceful protesters. Don't know if it can survive Trump. Three years as Pres: American Carnage. Not 30 days of peace!
The reason that "When was the last time we beat China in a trade deal?" is a loaded question is because it assumes that trade deals are a win-lose proposition where one party wins and other loses. One cannot answer this question without conceding the highly questionable assumption.
It was a rhetorical question. He's not expecting an answer. But thats the first thing the left does whenever he says something, look for fallacies. Never listening to what he's saying.
@@siggyretburns7523 That's not the point. Trump makes the assumption that you could beat someone in a trade deal. But that is not true. Trade deals are not a fight where one wins and another one loses.
@@Max-md6jv bargaining, negotiating, etc. You try to get the better of the deal. Thats why its called trade. Always negotiable. Its not a violent exchange. No physical beating takes place. But what has that got to do with anything anyways? And I dont think I've ever heard a supermarket commercial that doesn't boasts, "Unbeatable prices" .
@@siggyretburns7523 The supermarket making these commercials is in a competition to other supermarkets. They talk about unbeatable prices because they're actually in a fight over who can offer the lowest price for a product. The problem is that this just does not apply to trade deals between countries. While there is negotiation and bargaining, its still mostly just talks about an agreement that brings benefits to both sides. Everyone should be happy at the end of the deal. For Trump everything is a competition where he tries "win". There's no competitor or enemy in a trade deal.
Not quite. That would be a strawman, there. There may be other reasons, such as a habit, or an appeal to their own authority to reinforce a belief. Not that I think you're entirely wrong. In fact, I have little in my current experience to suggest anything except for that.
I’m doing logical fallacies in politics for my social issues essay and this is helping me understand how to correctly identify fallacies. I just would like to say thank you so much because this essay is the only thing I can turn in still to help me pass ELA.
@Natalie... So, (currently) 5 years have passed... (Honestly, respectfully) Was learning about logical fallacies all it was cracked up to be? Has pointing out everyone else's logical fallacies advanced your career at all? (Unless, you're a professional YT debater) I'm guessing- No.
@@MarkLewis... "theres no point in learning anything unless it advances your career" is what youre saying lmao - that just isnt true is it. besides, as a scientist i use logic every day. logical fallacies are a part of that, yes. very important to think critically when researching literature prior to research design. maybe not so useful just working at mcdonalds like yourself though? 🤣🤣😉
@Professional Ass Chomper YOU TRULY DIDNT UNDERSTAND WHAT THE NARRATOR of the VIDEO means by FALLACYS ! Democrats SEE RIGHT THROUGH trumps IDIOTIC FALLACYS ! DUH ! .
It amazes me how someone so inarticulate can use language so effectively to manipulate people. We all need to acquire the ability to deconstruct and interpret the reality of what politicians say.
He is the only one who sounds logical sound out of the two parties. Maybe JFK's son, but nobody is letting him win. Every single Democrat is a demagog and a lying unhinhed piece of communist sh****.
I love the way Trump is preoccupied with winning. You don't "beat" a country in a deal. What is the definition of "beating"? In an international agreement, neither party gets exactly what they want, both are a bit annoyed, but both also recognise the benefits the deal will bring. If that were not the case, no international deals could ever be done. Politics is the art of the possible, and political skill is the ability to negotiate and compromise effectively. And this is why Trump is a total and complete failure, as a business man, a president, a man, and as a human being. He has not a single shred of human decency in him, has absolutely no shame, and he is the type of man you warn your son not to become.
It’s the businessman in him, he has trouble thinking of things in another way. His goal here was to show off and sell himself to his voters, much like you would sell yourself in an interview by exaggerating things and telling stories.
I would like to point out that a fallacy does NOT immediately make someone's argument false. It makes it illogical. There is a fallacy-fallacy where immediately discounting something that someone has said by pointing out one of their fallacies is, in itself fallacious. The only point in noting fallacies is to either A: point it out to weaken their argument, or B: to see people trying to manipulate you.
While that is true, in this case, as with so much Trump says and infers falsehoods fly like the breeze itself. If you are unable to see that I feel so very sorry for you and yours.
Even though it was two years ago, I thank you for this comment. I've talked with a number of people who get so wound up in sniffing out fallacies in one another's remarks that they can't even finish a simple conversation. I think fallacies are very useful if you're trying to prove something to someone else, or if you're trying to protect yourself from being manipulated. However, some people seem to use fallacies disdainfully and with self-righteousness or arrogance, as a means to try to shame another person into having doubt, without actually putting forth any argument of their own. This seems especially prone in pregraduate political discussion these days, and it really is a shame. I'm of the opinion that, along with learning what fallacies art, it would be helpful to learn how to use them fairly and respectfully, while keeping an open and unbiased mind. Comments like yours, I think, might encourage people to be a little less volatile, and a little more willing to listen.
Thank you for creating this video, I am glad to know I am not the only one dismayed by the many, many logical fallacy offenses used in politics and sadly believed by so many.
I had to turn it off after 5 minutes when he started the juvenile name calling. Then what do they do? Vote him in as President!!! I still can’t believe it.
@@FringePrincess I find it far more disturbing how much he got away with in office, how the party has adopted his more effective tactics, and the large following who worship the ground he walks on.
The Fallacy Fallacy is that even if the argument is a fallacy, it maybe the truth. Trump doesn't care what influence technique he uses, as long as focus is placed on his position, people will have to decide the truth based on their own research, as he lives rent free in their heads.
@@MarkLewis... - As the late, immortal Mr. Kevin Samuels says, BULLSH*T! These are adults. They can take my information or leave it. In fact, I encourage them to question my lessons as much as possible. I also warn them not to waste their valuable time arguing with random idiots on the internet. Seems like I need to take my own dang advice!
Isn't it amazing that this one absolutely essential skill is not taught in school I went all the way through 12 years of school and was never introduced to the idea. I had to fight it on my own.
In high school, I lettered in Debate. On the very first day of class, we learned the Slippery Slope argument. It wasn't until _decades_ later, during a deep dive into Rhetorical Logic, that I learned how the _very_ first debate technique I learned is, in fact, a textbook logical fallacy. I recently learned the word, "Specious," which means, "Superficially plausible, but actually wrong." That description applies to most...if not all...logical fallacies. If you don't look past the surface of the argument, it's compelling; however, those who know how to spot the holes _will._ Side Note: What inspired my deep dive was having somebody accuse _me_ of using a Straw Man. I didn't know what it was, so I went down the rabbit hole. Turned out he was wrong.
It breaks your heart that Trump defeated Mrs Bill Clinton!!???!! She is one of the most dirty, scandal ridden, corrupt, bought and paid for scumbag politicians that has ever lived. Mr. Trump works for free and is not a politician (although he became a statesman). Donald Trump is literally the epitome of American success. He turned a small fortune into a HUGE fortune, built a world wide business employing thousands, raised scandal free, successful, hard working, family oriented children, married a super-model, decided to run for President and WON. Dude is success personified.
@@OdintheGermanShepherd I understand why you'd think Trump is a success, you're a beautiful doggo who has no ability to read. Gotta ask, what's so wonderful about marrying a supermodel? Couldn't be too great or he wouldn't have screwed around on her. He's had many bankruptcies, and daddy's money has bailed him out. But if you want to think this man is the epitome of success, that's okay. But I have one thing to say to that..NO, bad dog!
There is no ground to argue with Trump supporters ; they either live in a world of their own, or are voluntarily inclined to distort the truth for their own interest. The end result is the same, which is no logical argument can reach them
A classical education was based on the Trivium - Grammar, Logic, and Rhetoric. Grammar is learning the mechanics of language so one can express their thoughts and experiences clearly. Logic is the mechanics of clear thinking so one can remove inherent contradictions from an argument or claim. Rhetoric is the mechanics of communicating clearly and rationally. One must first master these foundational skills for clear thinking, speaking, and making arguments. Then one is ready for the Quadrivium, which includes Math, Geometry, Music, and Astronomy. Math is basic number theory, geometry is numbers in space, music is numbers in time, astronomy is numbers in space and time. Bringing the Trivium and Quadrivium back into basic education would solve the problems with democracy in America, as the citizenry would possess the skills and intelligence necessary to prevent charlatans and demagogues from getting into elected office.
9:45 "when did we beat Japan...?" OMG!!!! seriously? To me, stuff like this distracts from anything he's trying to say, because now I'm remembering how the U.S. dropped nuclear bombs on Japan instead of listening to him, and I feel like he's oblivious to reality at this point.
@@Vanirvis He is, but he also phrases the sentence "at anything" and not "in trade negotiations". Lack of historical sensibility and taste, at the least.
@@Vanirvis It's not the audiences job to discern context, it's the speakers job to formulate a cohesive statement. His wording suggests that he isn't proficient at English.
This is an incredible, incredible video. Thank you so much! Your coherent explanations have inspired me to work even harder on my critical thinking and reasoning.
I think starting with top 10 current events (any topic) as selected by the students would give a pretty great basis. It also would aide self analysis of their own logic thinking.
Thank you SO much for this! I REALLY appreciate the discussion after each fallacy is identified. I will be relying upon you to get through the rest of my Logic class.
Who in their right mind can stand one minute of this crap he dishes out ?? Done with this .. I can't I supported this crap with money canvassing , votes .. NO MORE!!!!
I think pointing out logical fallacies is a useful exercise. Politicians from both sides rarely practice logic and reason. What’s even sadder is that now the MS media has lost all sense of being logical or reasonable.
Covfefe Dk Propaganda is propaganda regardless of source. In most cases it is fairly easy to fact check a story and ALL aides engage in spin. That’s why it’s incredibly important to research and use discernment to determine what is a fact and what isn’t. My point is that the best tools to do that were given to us by philosophy; Hume, Locke, Descartes. When one applies these principles along with research from non-biased sources, it isn’t rocket science to separate truth from fiction.
James Clary Alas, many people have no concept of Descartes, and it would be quite unreasonable to expect them to even know who Locke is. And to be honest, the great mystery is why so many willingly overlook lies, fraud, racism, bigotry and treason? What makes them discard traits in one man that they fiercely protest about in others?
Covfefe Dk Ignorance vis a vis “it would be unreasonable for them to know Locke” is no excuse. In any intellectual examination of ideas, a reasonable assumption is that both sides are flawed in some respect. To believe otherwise would be the highest form of simplicity. The question for me is not whether a position (whether espoused by an org like Brietbart or by an individual like AOC) has flaws. They all do. But rather which position best promulgates the positions I hold dear. Those are primarily personal liberty, equality of opportunity and unbridled freedom to do or say as we wish within the framework of the non-aggression principle.
Sure, 95% on the right, and the left is forced to do 5% or...They're finished. They can't compete. The mainstream media is very, very consistent and dependable at reporting facts. These entities are profoundly damaged or ruined when they lie. The examples are many. Now, narratives on the other hand are another story. Learn to reject the narratives. The news is there to tell us accurately what the GDP is or what Russia did to Ukraine today. The mainstream media do that ably, they are called to account, sued and put out of business when rhey don't. And I most certainly am not referring to the proudly biased right wing lie factories who can only survive by rebranding themselves as "entertainment". Where do we learn systematically to reject false narratives? Well, college is a good place. So it is contingent upon this garbage working effectively to discredit higher learning. Which we now of course see everywhere.
You are giving sophisticated analysis of Trumps political verbal strategies. The strategy Trump uses the most is the childhood game I am rubber you are glue whatever you say goes back to you!
A quick read of George Orwell's novel, 1984 will equip almost anyone with the basic tools necessary for spotting and targeting campaign propaganda and the mechanisms of mass coercion and control.
Awesome video I been analyzing trumps fallacies for a while, thanks for unmask this clown, I hope the u.s. people open their eyes and don't let this man play the bullfight with them
You missed the entire intro point that this was not a political study. This is a logical study and the absurdities exposed in logical analysis go VERY strongly in any number of political speeches. (I would suggest that it applies in all "influencer" speeches when they are seeking to move an undecided target group.) Some call the ability to create an action in others leadership. Using tried and true tropes (valid or not) are only questioned later based on viewpoints.(opinions that may or may not themselves be based in logic)
Trump just says that there is a lot of people, wow thousands ... nothing more. How is that a fallacy. Somebody enters a room And says... hey that a lot of people... that is not a fallacy. Otherwise every word is a fallacy.
These logical fallacies are effective when dealing with an audience without any training in logic, basic reasoning, and ignorance about the world outside the US. As a European travelling in the US, I was astounded by the lack of basic understanding of the world outside the US. What compounds this is this overconfidence in the beliefs and prejudices some people have in place of knowledge. Those who know always doubt, those who know nothing are full of certainty. I wonder, what do they study in school?
Paul Makinson, America’s Educational System has been broken for decades. The fault lies with the GOP (Conservative), and Corporate Democratics, who’ve been busy with the “dumbing down of America”.
The beginning of my crusade awaits the answers to these very questions Paul. Please let me know as soon as you figure this out... for I have "thousands" of folks willing to join me at a moments notice!!! Lol*
@@c.a.savage5689 huh? In college many Americans study business, but, in high school they study useless things. Study skills, philosophy, psychology and finance are, amazingly, not taught. I would argue that those are exactly the subjects that should be taught. Interestingly, many private high schools do teach these subjects. Also, I'm hearing more and more kids saying they are getting these subjects in public school as electives, but, I think that is still the exception.
I am comparing Traitor Trump to Hitler, and it is not a hasty generalization. It is based on the many years Trump has promoted white supremacy and promoted the non-white scapegoat.
The reason why I said I wasn't comparing is because I might get flooded with responses saying how I am wrong for thinking Trump is Hitler or whatever. I do agree with what you're saying though.
@@Traitorman..Proverbs26.11 BS - he might be one but he never talks about it I guess he thinks his voters will be less enthusiastic. Do you care that Biden will be a puppet to the Left and have on his cabinet AOC, Beto, Pocahontas etc ? Trump's communication skills and logic seem ridiculous rock-bottom for a president, that has been obvious well before he was elected. But what matters? I am only concerned that we could lose military strength and become much great of a socialist state.
@@TheSnapback Coward. I think that AOC is a fascist and certainly talks like one. Trump is quasi-fascist. A Biden presidency will have the love the Leftist media and will hurt our country in many ways. They never challenge crazy leftist ideas that are a beautiful ideology but have never worked anywhere. Also, Sweden’s move away from the socialist policies that almost destroyed its economy to a more market-based economy should be noted by our ignorant populace that swallows everything the media feeds them.
PRESIDENT TRUMP 2024 The problem isn't that President Trump won't receive enough votes in 2024 to win the election. The problem is that there are people in the government from both sides, ( left & right ) who are willing to rig election, break laws, & really do just about anything in order to make sure that President Trump doesn't get reelected as President of the United States of America. PRESIDENT TRUMP 2024 The FBI are being sued for a trillion dollars for they're mishandling of the Larry Nassar Olympic scandal. How can " We the People " trust certain Law Enforcement Agencies here in America when it has been proven for a fact that they refuse to put they're political beliefs aside in order to accurately & honestly perform their duties while on the clock? 04/14/22 Over a dozen schools in Indiana received Islamic Type Terror threats of a bomb. The FBI is probably the ones who sent them though. Alot of Hoosiers are seriously questioning the authenticity of this story & how it is being presented on the Main$treamNews channels Yet utube keeps censoring the comments regarding our questions about the FBI's involvement do to their credibility lately when it comes to putting aside their political ideas when attempting to do their job & pursuit JUSTICE. Also comments regarding M$M's role in reporting the news & telling us the truth is being censored aswell. We The People, We are tired of being used as targets for the Dem's, & Rep's, to use when they are attempting to push through they're HomeLandSecurity agendas. utube also censors people who support President Trump. I believe that utube can even manipulate the like tally on videos to make it look like something is either being supported by the people or if it is not being supported. The purpose of manipulating the like tally should be illegal when portraying a false narrative, especially when that false narrative affects the election of the President of the United States of America. My question is..... How is this not restricting free speech? Utube censors my comments all the time, they even have turned my wifi off after I left a controversial yet community guideline friendly comment. Ive had my same TV for well over a year now and last week for some reason. When I tried to turn it on, it was a blue screen asking me if I would allow google to periodically listen in for the purpose of me enhancing the enjoyment of my TV experience. I tried to answer no I didnt want to give permission but the screen refused to change until I finally after a hour or so gave in and clicked I agree. My question is...... How is this legal ? - American Intermediary
Even now, June '23, there's a distressing number of folks who don't seem capable of acknowledging truth & logic have any worth or meaning. I'm 71 & fear for America with this attitude having such influence. Other than this everything is swell!
"They're not sending their best, they're not sending you." Straw man, appeal to emotion, black or white... if logical fallacies made presidents Trump would be unbeatable.
Argumentum Ad ignorantiam . Mexico does sends many immigrants who are perfectally a "good fit " for the American mainstream : dilligent , hardworking , complaint , innovative ( think : Mexican restaurants that have mushroomed in the last couple of decades in Mexican majority cities and neighbourhoods ) . Albeit , it could be argued that south Americans ( Hispanics and Latinos ) do suffer at the hands of stereotypical media tropes ( like being a janitor, drug peddler , prison inmate ) , it could be argued that a vast majority of second or third generation South Americans are quite assimilated to the American mainstream . Therefore. , trumps rhetoric that "all mexicans / latinos / Hispanics " are blue -collar , low I Q. , Peasants who are fleeing drug war and depressions in their own country and transforming the socio -cultural landscape of U.S.A . Is at the verry least uninformed or verry incorrect.
Trump's campaign success says more about a lack of critical thinking in American politics than it says about any real skill with language and political rhetoric. It is still incomprehensible to me that anyone could listen to this man for more than three minutes and not think one is trapped in a cartoon, at a cartoon campaign rally, listening to a cartoon tyrant.
One of his false premises is that life is a zero sum game at which 'our' side can only succeed by 'beating' 'their' side into failure. Often we are all more successful by working together.
The US actually edges out Japan on the International Innovation Index, a particularly impressive feat when you consider that the US is around 3 times larger than Japan (smaller countries tend to do better on the III. China, a technological leader by all accounts, is ranked 27. Singapore is of course ranked first, as it is both small and industrious, and South Korea second for the same reasons, but Switzerland, Iceland, Ireland, and Finland are also all ranked above the US).
The US has industrial and innovation diversity, while all the countries you mentioned have (for the most part) myopic industrial and innovation focus. When you focus all your efforts on 1 thing, you're probably going to lead at that 1 thing. So, I ask you, which is better. To be the best at only the innovation index and mediocre at everything else... or... be really good at many things? (It's subjective, but...)
Have you considered the fact that the US is also the worlds largest importer of foreign researchers, while a country such as Japan has extreemly low numbers ?
Marcos 989 I thought you were just trolling, sorry. No and no, then. I've been on the internet since the late 90's and Uruguay has an impressively good connectivity, albeit a bit expensive when you want access to high bandwidths; other than that, free wifi in most populated areas.
OMG. I was just about to add a comment to say "ad hominem". You sir are the first person I have ever heard say this word! It makes me happy to hear. Also it reminds me of the time in my life that I learned the word paradigm, but mispronounced it for quite a while as "pear-uuh-dig-em". (Having only encountered both words in written text)
A teaching colleague sent me the link to this video for possible use in class (among other courses, I teach introduction to philosophy). As far as I can see, there are a number of errors in it regarding the fallacies. The narrator of the video actually identifies 18 alleged instances of logical fallacies. In the order in which they are identified in the narration, they are: Bandwagon; False Cause; Black or White; Loaded Question; Anecdotal; Fallacy; Strawman; Appeal to Emotion; Appeal to Emotion; Slippery Slope; Circular Reasoning; Black or White; Appeal to Authority; Genetic Fallacy; Composition; Common Sense; Black or White; Personal Incredulity. But, again, as far as I can see, the narrator is correct about only seven of those (1, 8, 9, 11, 12, 16, 17); and in two of the seven (11 & 12), the explanations as to why it is an example of that fallacy are not entirely correct.
OK, but why wouldn't a candidate making claims also be considered an argument for why he is a better choice? That is the whole purpose of him getting up to that mic in the first place. The whole speech is an argument for why we should vote for him.
That is the subtext, but its never stated as an argument, therefore it is not a logical fallacy. When a candidate gives a speech they talk about the issues they care about, and about their policies, goals and aspirations. If these match up closely with your values then you should vote for them. If Trump had said "everybody knows America isn't great anymore," then that would be a real appeal to popularity. What does he mean by great? Why should we believe the crowd? Aren't statistics a better metric? This is an informal logical fallacy because he is making a truth claim "America isn't great anymore," and he backs it up with an appeal to the crowd "everybody knows." Whereas, simply making claims - even false claims, isn't fallacious.
Mark Lowe I don’t see why this would be problematic. Teaching why some argument is identified as a fallacy incorrectly or that the reason backing up a correctly identified fallacy is not sound is still instructional.
My thesis or "passing thought" is that anyone speaking positively about Trump under this video will have noticably poor language skills. No doubt I will get funding for such vital research
bandr well your a demoncrap so you are guilty of supporting slavery, you assume that people will not call you out on your guilt, slaver you are wrong - we should sell demoncraps to American Africans that should balance the scales
Having watched the video the whole way through now, there are enough big problems and misunderstandings of the subject that I'll go through the rest of the problems one by one: The second critique does point out a really egregiously fallacious argument. However, false cause isn't a specific type of logical fallacy, and I would personally say the fallacy committed doesn't actually fall into the false cause category, but rather is a slippery slope fallacy. The argument follows along the lines of "they failed to prepare in this small way for a debate, therefore they would have failed (to prepare adequately) in leading a war". Though in your defense, you could make an argument that it's jumping to conclusions, which is a false cause. As you say, his argument there is really just a mess. When you point out the fallacy fallacy at around 11 minutes, this is somewhat confusing, as it isn't critiquing something Trump did, but something that the view MAY have done. I definitely think it's worth mentioning, but putting it up there in the same format as the ones you're laying at Trump's feet is somewhat confusing. For what you claim is a strawman argument: it's pretty questionable to call it a strawman. His argument is actually so vague as to be entirely meaningless here, but it is mostly a loaded question with a bit of Black and White thrown in. The real insidiousness of the argument is that to address it at all by either, coming up with something that he could discount as "not really winning" or by asking him to clarify what he means by winning, which he would spin to sound like you were prevaricating because you couldn't give an example of winning at the boarder, would make you appear weak and let him declare victory. Making it so vague could be called simplifying the argument, but that doesn't make it a strawman. What you identify as a slippery slope just isn't one. Slippery slopes are spurious predictions about the future, and cannot exist in the past tense. Because it deals with a known outcome, it would be a false cause of some kind. In this case, he's employing the cum hoc or post hoc fallacy. It depends on how long he believes we've been being "beat" at the boarder. For circular reasoning: it just isn't there. It's not even really implied. It's really just flattery. The implied reason for saying they're the best and brightest is because they agree with him, which is sort of an appeal to authority, but it would only be circular reasoning if it also claimed that he derived that authority from them agreeing with them: "They're the best and brightest because they agree with me- I'm right because the best and brightest agree with me". The actual content here doesn't explicitly or implicity supply a reason as to why Trump is right, let alone one that points back to the beginning. Without a circle there's no circular reasoning. The Mexico selecting people to send across the boarder is actually a pretty good example of a strawman. You should have used this as the example of a strawman. The Black and White thing before it isn't a very strong example, especially because of his backtrack to "some, I assume, are good people". I know some of this stuff sounds kinda petty. For the most part your critiques are fair and reasonably accurate. I only say reasonably because there are often multiple fallacies at play simultaneously but I understand you go only for the most prominent for the sake of clarity. If you are educating, you need to try to be as accurate and clear as possible, and in the cases above you fall short of both.
logic as an analysis tool does ultimately fail as it is an abstraction, an oversimplification. When you say the arguments are illogical, it is a non sequitor, it does not follow, that he can’t lead. The fact that he DOESN’T CHOOSE to make a “logical” argument does not mean he CANNOT make a “logical” argument. Just because someone is logical, it does not follow that the person won’t stab you in the back. Who can you trust? The person who will do anything for you, who will lay down their life for you, who will say any crazy thing to you that pops into his head. He is unveiled, transparent, authentic. People like that, people vote for that. Its refreshing. Besides, nobody can lead, and anybody can lead. Its irrelevant. The real question is: who will follow?
Yes, Trump did not appeal to his popularity in that particular instance, but I believe that one should drae every posible instance where the listener may draw fallacious conclussions, despute the fact that they are not being stated.
Quick clarification, "Ad Hominems" aren't insults, so calling you an "Idiot" isn't actually an Ad Hominem. It's when you take something FACTUAL about the person (the hominem part) to use as a rebuttal as their argument. Example a German citizen lectures us on the benefits of socialized welfare mixed with capitalistic welfare and I attack him by saying "He's totally wrong, he's German for Christ's sake, what does he know about socialism in the U.S"? Using the fact that he's German doesn't make him wrong, I attacked his character. Calling him an "ldiot" doesn't actually make it true just cause I'm mad at him. Maybe he's a genius?
lmaooo I'm doing a paper for my grade 12 philosophy course and this video is a gold mine thank you so much. It's exactly what my paper is on and I'm gonna keep it strictly on Donald Trump
I grew up in LA and a philosophy course was not offered at my school. What city do you live that offers a philosophy course in high school? I would rather know the school but that may be too personal information for a RUclips comment.
Trump would say, who says it's a logical fallacy? Anyone can make up crap and call it anything they want. In a court of law, if you tried to point out logical fallacies the other side was using, you would get laughed out of court. Logical falacies are a bunch of BS.
"When did we beat Japan at anything?" Well Donald, we definitely won the nuclear bomb dropping contest 2 to 0. I don't believe this is a loaded question. It's just a really stupid one.
Not strictly true. His "we" is the United States. Yours is the Allied Forces. I'm not aware of anytime that the US by itself has defeated anyone, except itself in the Civil War. One could argue the "Indian Wars" if one was willing to acknowledge that shameful pogrom of deceit and betrayal as a war. Even the creation of the weapon which brought about the Japanese surrender was largely due to the participation of European scientists.
That’s complicated. The bombs very likely only ended the war slightly sooner. The Soviet Union entered the war on the same day as the atomic bomb based on agreements put into place by the Allies. The Japanese were ready to surrender but just wanted to preserve the Emperor, the center of Shintoism, which happened anyway. The Japanese preferred being primarily accepting an American defeat as opposed to Soviet troops on the ground. The US was preparing for conflict with the Soviet Union and vice versa. They were very likely dropped more so because of the diplomatic leverage it gave to the US against the Soviet Union in addition to racism, incentives to justify war spending, and anger over Pearl Harbor. See Alperovitz’s book titled Atomic Diplomacy.
"He find himself hard-pressed to piece together a sound political argument." That's definitely one of the better characterizations of Donald Trump that I've heard.
I thought I loved my English Literature Honors class, scored the A, until the following semester when taking English Critical Thinking, only got a B+, however, it's still harder to remember how to write a definition paper, than to remember all those fallacies that I could then rattle off as friends, family, and snotty teachers that couldn't debate their way out of a, you guessed it, a wet paper bag. Non Sequitur was my favorite fallacy as a freshman to call folks out on. It was like they were cheating, conversationally speaking. As a Sophomore, my fave was Ad Hominem. It was a natural progression: as a result of all the non-sequiturs they traded for ad Hominem attacks upon me. That's not an illogical fallacy.🤐
Though I am not particularly fond of Trump, so do I want to point out that the first fallacy you mention, does not really hold water since he only stated there were many people. He never said anything about his candidacy being justified because of it. It can be taken as just a blank statement. That is at least my impression of it
I that was the first thing I noticed. Ironically I'm probably going to have to throw this baby out with the bathwater and find another video on fallacies that doesn't blow it on its first try.
In the specific context of the video, Trump is only stating a fact. But generally speaking, he does use this observation as a mean to bolster his credibility --- just not in this specific instance, which the analyst should have identified as so. Notwithstanding, it's a fallacy fallacy to assume that a mistake entirely poison the other points.
Philosophy needs to be taught in general education. The lack of it is why we lack critical thinkers on a mass scale.
This is true.
This is rhethoric, not philosophy
what's the difference between those two things?
*****
Rhetoric (without the "h", my bad) is the art of the argument, navigation of discourse. It originated as a branch of the philosophy of language and has developed into an analytical field of studies. Usually philosophy comes in where natural sciences fail.
Hell yes. The American education system has failed us. This is easily seen in democracies.
"Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities.”
- Voltaire
wow, this coupled with him telling his supporters to kill immigrant oh no
Well, I guess Voltaire's hypothesis has recently gained some support
Damn it, I hate being right sometimes....
@@gtlinus was just talking about this quote the other day when watching an Albert Bandura video. This quote can sum up so much of the worlds history, as well as the dangers of the future.
Channel name What’s your issue with socialism?
Time Stamps for everybody! :)
Bandwagon(1st) = 4:48
False Cause(2nd) = 6:30
Black or White(3rd) = 7:24
Loaded Question(4th) = 8:13
Anecdotal(5th) = 9:04
Fallacy(6th) = 10:33
Straw Man(7th) = 11:57
Appeal to emotion(8th) = 14:59
Black or white (9th) = 17:00
Composition(10th) = 17:43
Common Sense (11th) = 19:18
Black and white (12th) = 19:40
Personal (13th) = 20:15
You didn’t list all of them so what’s the point
Will - This is helpful! Thank you.
Maybe his name (Brandon) is a hint?
Thank you!
These are rethorical devices not logical fallacies, the video is absolutely wrong and has no clue about anything.
"they don't know about air conditioning, how can they beat ISIS?"
😂😂 that one got me good
😂
O😊😅😅 0:29
Dons my man! I would like to be his friend. I have all respect for him a very smart businessman.😊🎉 would like to meet him someday.
The building I work in has really good air conditioning. Maybe the company I work for can beat ISIS? 🤣
I died a little when people started cheering for this guy. This video parsed Trump's speech very thoroughly.
I never believed a word he has ever said.
Who do u want to run the government.please put forward your name s .DJT does not have to do what he's doing.time will tell .
@@stevenlight5006 I would have liked Bernie Sanders, but I would be happy with Sheldon Whitehouse, Katie Porter, Adam Schiff, John Fetterman, Cory Booker, or Michelle Obama, to name but a few. But, let's be clear about this; I would rather elect a lung oyster than see Tre45on return to the Whitehouse.
@@stevenlight5006 bernie sanders is the obvious pick, neither trump nor biden has a clue. people on the left having to pick biden is the biggest political upset in US history
What say now in 2023 I have all the Proof that Trump is for real,as far back as the early 90s,he was asked to run by the Military who knew America was being destroyed from the inside out by Obama Clinton China and the Deep State,Trump didn't plan to become President he was ready to retire,and if he spoke in riddles it was deliberate he wanted the enemy to think he wasn't fit to run as President.
Trump is a true Patriot he has more than proved that he was the best person to save the US and the world,President Trump has fulfilled every promise he made and much more,despite over a dozen assassination attempts and false claims made against him he never quit,when this movie is finally over there will be a hell of lot of shocked and demented Trump haters,Trump really is the King of all Kings.
Loved the characterizing of logical fallacies as "cheat code". Thanks for that perspective.
It's how someone like trump cheats Joe podunk Shmo into support.
Why can't logic be taught in schools?!?
Because an educated population would see through this grade school form of argument. We would stop electing liars. We would stop buying products and services from abusive, greedy organizations. We would stop watching TV News and demand actual investigative journalism. We would evolve into the great society we were meant to be: Liberty, Justice, Fair Play, and Fair Pay for All.
it is tho
@@plaidprogressive5937 But the world is not totally logical...its inner working is anything but logical.... LOL!
Maths
Why can't?
What use is a population of critical thinkers to those who would wield the power of humanity through deceit?
I love to find when other people understand the immense power of language, the use of certain logical fallacies and exploitation of ignorance. I fully believe that these concepts are the entire foundation for how society has gotten to the point of the masses regularly voting away their own power and against their own material interests for people who quite regularly blatantly display their own disregard for the will of the voter in favor of their own ideological and material gains.
Yeah. Damn those democrats.
Very well spoken.
@@tedpeters9699 thank you, sir. We have to be able to coherently relay the need to start thinking for ourselves and push back against this now long running issue of people being unwilling to challenge the ideas and narratives given to us by institutions who have proven time and again that their first, second and third interest is in protecting the ruling class and the ideology that keeps them in power and the masses docile. For profit media outlets owned by the literal ruling elites with a financial interest, it is also in their higher interest to tell things in a way that protect their material interests and we will never hear voices that actually show the working masses that we have to demand a different way. They will cloak their narrative in rhetoric and vocabulary that tug at our heart strings and those virtues which we have been raised to hold most dear. The first way we start to move on is by recognizing that the same things always crash the economy - deregulation coupled with tax cuts. Those who have been going along with these actions without screaming at the top of their lungs, have to be removed from power, and we have to start talking and learning about the ways that do the opposite - stop funneling money straight to the top. Even if we have to use government to do so because right now it is the only tool we have, and start building locally from the ground up to take back the tools of direct action, labor strikes and civil disobedience.
using logical fallacies to manipulate people using their cognitive biases now that's what i call true manipulation XD
"Exploitation of ignorance." Oof, what a quote! That's all politics seems to be anymore to me.
Your analysis has more meaning and emphasis now more than it did 4 years ago regarding Pres. Trump. Great job, Sir.
Another 3 years Later and we are further down the rabbit hole
@@teekanne15 What shocks me is that there are still some people, few but some, that hang on this man's every word like he is God. Oh, wait a minute.....
Watching this seven years later it is still stunning! Trump used logical fallacies in every sentence - sometimes more than one per sentence! Thank you for dissecting Trump’s speech and showing how fallacious he is!
welcome to the world of politics.
@@pimpkramer441 Yes every politician uses all kinds of logical fallacies all the time but Trump was, and still is, THE unrivaled king of "bandwagon" and "ad hominem" fallacies. Almost everything he says publicly can be boiled down to a) how popular he is (crowd size, ratings, donations, poll numbers etc.) and b) how evil and corrupt his perceived "enemies" are.
It's not Trump who is fallacious, it's all the people in Washington who are trying to destroy the country with their globalist, one world goveenment agenda. Trump 2024!
I enjoy the academic analysis too...but it doesn't make the man wrong about a single thing. Fentanyl and trafficked humans pour in through our southern border, not engineers and doctors. The US does participate in atrocious trade deals that put America last.
@@EtTubeBruTube LOL. The arguments he puts forth are fallacious - the conclusions do not follow from the premises. You just like them because you agree with them, not because they're true.
Using Trump as an example is also advantageous because he Amplifies these traits . All politicians , indeed most people, are guilty of wallowing in logical fallacies to be sure , but no one is as brash and grandiose as Trump.
"When Fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in("Hugging") the flag and carrying a cross(Bible)."
~Sinclair Lewis
Carrying a Bible upside down and like it has a disease.
@@rboss5919 haha Cult 45 disease. He plays RW Christians like a seasoned televangelist.
US went on life support June 1 when the Fascist turned chemicals & rubber bullets on peaceful protesters. Don't know if it can survive Trump. Three years as Pres: American Carnage.
Not 30 days of peace!
@@rboss5919 Demons always do things the opposite of God. Dictator Donny holding the Holy Bible backwards and upside down was a HUGE sign!
@@rboss5919 Well, it turned out not to actually be upside-down. But the way he held it, yeah.
Logical fallacies are the main weapons of demagogues.
#Truthdotcom
You just did a genetic logical fallacy.
... and trumpers don't know the definition of '' logical fallacies '' or '' demagogue '' and, worst of all, couldn't care less to know.
Everyone makes them and you are making a genetic fallacy
@@jerrylanglois7892 Show me your positions and I'll pick them apart
The reason that "When was the last time we beat China in a trade deal?" is a loaded question is because it assumes that trade deals are a win-lose proposition where one party wins and other loses. One cannot answer this question without conceding the highly questionable assumption.
is that called begging the question?
It was a rhetorical question. He's not expecting an answer.
But thats the first thing the left does whenever he says something, look for fallacies. Never listening to what he's saying.
@@siggyretburns7523 That's not the point. Trump makes the assumption that you could beat someone in a trade deal. But that is not true. Trade deals are not a fight where one wins and another one loses.
@@Max-md6jv bargaining, negotiating, etc. You try to get the better of the deal. Thats why its called trade. Always negotiable. Its not a violent exchange. No physical beating takes place.
But what has that got to do with anything anyways?
And I dont think I've ever heard a supermarket commercial that doesn't boasts, "Unbeatable prices" .
@@siggyretburns7523 The supermarket making these commercials is in a competition to other supermarkets. They talk about unbeatable prices because they're actually in a fight over who can offer the lowest price for a product.
The problem is that this just does not apply to trade deals between countries. While there is negotiation and bargaining, its still mostly just talks about an agreement that brings benefits to both sides. Everyone should be happy at the end of the deal. For Trump everything is a competition where he tries "win". There's no competitor or enemy in a trade deal.
Anyone who says "Believe me" only says it because they know they can't be believed.
You may want to look up the fallacy of composition.
Not quite. That would be a strawman, there. There may be other reasons, such as a habit, or an appeal to their own authority to reinforce a belief.
Not that I think you're entirely wrong. In fact, I have little in my current experience to suggest anything except for that.
I’m doing logical fallacies in politics for my social issues essay and this is helping me understand how to correctly identify fallacies. I just would like to say thank you so much because this essay is the only thing I can turn in still to help me pass ELA.
Oh you'll pass trust me these teachers are hard-core democrats you could just write an essay bashing Trump and you'd be giving the medal of honor 😂😂😂
@Natalie... So, (currently) 5 years have passed... (Honestly, respectfully) Was learning about logical fallacies all it was cracked up to be? Has pointing out everyone else's logical fallacies advanced your career at all? (Unless, you're a professional YT debater) I'm guessing- No.
@@MarkLewis... "theres no point in learning anything unless it advances your career" is what youre saying lmao - that just isnt true is it. besides, as a scientist i use logic every day. logical fallacies are a part of that, yes. very important to think critically when researching literature prior to research design. maybe not so useful just working at mcdonalds like yourself though? 🤣🤣😉
@@thyowen "...as a scientist..." Lol.
BTW: The "So you're saying..." misrepresentation of an argument is the straw man fallacy.
"As a scientist..." 😂
@Professional Ass Chomper YOU TRULY DIDNT UNDERSTAND WHAT THE NARRATOR of the VIDEO means by FALLACYS ! Democrats SEE RIGHT THROUGH trumps IDIOTIC FALLACYS ! DUH ! .
I love that: "When did we beat Japan at anything?"
*Cough* WWII
He didn't stated that.
I know, I know, it was implied. But it's great opportunity for a joke, don't you think?
i was thinking the same thing lol
china
Tezii Is China relevant to this thread?
Staremperor
of course
Applying logical analysis to Trump's speeches is like having a doctoral committee consider a first grader's essay.
I appreciate what you are trying to do. Unfortunately logic has been systemically eradicated.
The Dry Tortuga ....only the Red Hats?
Logic commonly gets forced out the house only to re enter through the back door.
If you would use your brain you would realize that these are not logical fallacies but rethorical devices
@@Gamer-ec7gd a perfect statement
I can't wait to vote for Trump again, because they forced a transgender into Hogwarts Legacy.
It amazes me how someone so inarticulate can use language so effectively to manipulate people.
We all need to acquire the ability to deconstruct and interpret the reality of what politicians say.
Well, some people spend their lives learning how to cure illnesses, some other spend it learning how to cheat.
He is the only one who sounds logical sound out of the two parties. Maybe JFK's son, but nobody is letting him win. Every single Democrat is a demagog and a lying unhinhed piece of communist sh****.
I love the way Trump is preoccupied with winning.
You don't "beat" a country in a deal. What is the definition of "beating"? In an international agreement, neither party gets exactly what they want, both are a bit annoyed, but both also recognise the benefits the deal will bring. If that were not the case, no international deals could ever be done. Politics is the art of the possible, and political skill is the ability to negotiate and compromise effectively. And this is why Trump is a total and complete failure, as a business man, a president, a man, and as a human being. He has not a single shred of human decency in him, has absolutely no shame, and he is the type of man you warn your son not to become.
It’s the businessman in him, he has trouble thinking of things in another way. His goal here was to show off and sell himself to his voters, much like you would sell yourself in an interview by exaggerating things and telling stories.
When did we beat Japan at anything?
I was thinking about this, then it blew up in my face.
Twice.
What were the two times?
Nagasaki and Hiroshima
@@TheSnapback and two times germany.so glad we lost.otherwise it would be a horrible world.
@@TheSnapback the fact u think bombin 1000s is winning shows how evil u are and the american ppl
I would like to point out that a fallacy does NOT immediately make someone's argument false. It makes it illogical. There is a fallacy-fallacy where immediately discounting something that someone has said by pointing out one of their fallacies is, in itself fallacious. The only point in noting fallacies is to either A: point it out to weaken their argument, or B: to see people trying to manipulate you.
1 that was covered in the video. 2 Arguments can't be true or false. They can be sound/unsound or valid/invalid, but only claims can be true or false.
sorry. That came across more confrontational than I intended.
While that is true, in this case, as with so much Trump says and infers falsehoods fly like the breeze itself. If you are unable to see that I feel so very sorry for you and yours.
Even though it was two years ago, I thank you for this comment. I've talked with a number of people who get so wound up in sniffing out fallacies in one another's remarks that they can't even finish a simple conversation. I think fallacies are very useful if you're trying to prove something to someone else, or if you're trying to protect yourself from being manipulated. However, some people seem to use fallacies disdainfully and with self-righteousness or arrogance, as a means to try to shame another person into having doubt, without actually putting forth any argument of their own. This seems especially prone in pregraduate political discussion these days, and it really is a shame. I'm of the opinion that, along with learning what fallacies art, it would be helpful to learn how to use them fairly and respectfully, while keeping an open and unbiased mind. Comments like yours, I think, might encourage people to be a little less volatile, and a little more willing to listen.
Rhyno Orhyon 10:32
He didn't know there was toilet paper on his shoe. How could he defeat ISIS?
Source: "believe me bro"
🧂
the "appeal to authority" logical fallacy
@@jenniferp1917 is rife amongst believers
Among us
I originally started watching this for an English assignment, but this was actually really interesting.
Thank you for creating this video, I am glad to know I am not the only one dismayed by the many, many logical fallacy offenses used in politics and sadly believed by so many.
You believe your confirmation bias opinions not reality
it's so discouraging
There's so many fallacies. It's hard to remember them all.
Actually most of them are subsets of the non sequitur.
You usually know them when you hear or see them you just have to put a name to them
Watch thus video 100 times...
You're welcome
Why do all of the words sound made up? Like who talks like this, checking their vocabulary and language 24/7?
@@Dankdalorde cause it's scripted
When I watched US presidential debate out of curiosity I was shocked it was more like a rap battle than civilized debate. Seriously wtf America. 😂
The age of enlightenment is over.
I had to turn it off after 5 minutes when he started the juvenile name calling. Then what do they do? Vote him in as President!!! I still can’t believe it.
Tiihtu I know. As an American, I'm embarrassed.
@@FringePrincess I find it far more disturbing how much he got away with in office, how the party has adopted his more effective tactics, and the large following who worship the ground he walks on.
The Fallacy Fallacy is that even if the argument is a fallacy, it maybe the truth. Trump doesn't care what influence technique he uses, as long as focus is placed on his position, people will have to decide the truth based on their own research, as he lives rent free in their heads.
how does it feel?
When discussing this with my students, I always added the phrase “either intentional or unintentional” to the definition “error in reasoning.”
Poor manipulated kids.
unfortunately, or fortunately...
@@MarkLewis... - And how are students "poor" or "manipulated" when you teach them to THINK FOR THEMSELVES?
@@drsingingeagle You're not... You're teaching them to think like you.
@@MarkLewis... - As the late, immortal Mr. Kevin Samuels says, BULLSH*T! These are adults. They can take my information or leave it. In fact, I encourage them to question my lessons as much as possible.
I also warn them not to waste their valuable time arguing with random idiots on the internet. Seems like I need to take my own dang advice!
Excellent intellectual content. It is a shame that most people have no interest in this kind of analysis.
indeed
This is fascinating to watch this far into the future. This should be required viewing for all US citizens.
Isn't it amazing that this one absolutely essential skill is not taught in school I went all the way through 12 years of school and was never introduced to the idea. I had to fight it on my own.
In high school, I lettered in Debate. On the very first day of class, we learned the Slippery Slope argument. It wasn't until _decades_ later, during a deep dive into Rhetorical Logic, that I learned how the _very_ first debate technique I learned is, in fact, a textbook logical fallacy. I recently learned the word, "Specious," which means, "Superficially plausible, but actually wrong." That description applies to most...if not all...logical fallacies. If you don't look past the surface of the argument, it's compelling; however, those who know how to spot the holes _will._
Side Note: What inspired my deep dive was having somebody accuse _me_ of using a Straw Man. I didn't know what it was, so I went down the rabbit hole. Turned out he was wrong.
And yet he won. Breaks my heart that people would vote for him. His presidency has cost so many lives.
Madison Heights He didn’t win by numbers of votes. The electoral college elected him.
what lives?
It breaks your heart that Trump defeated Mrs Bill Clinton!!???!! She is one of the most dirty, scandal ridden, corrupt, bought and paid for scumbag politicians that has ever lived. Mr. Trump works for free and is not a politician (although he became a statesman). Donald Trump is literally the epitome of American success. He turned a small fortune into a HUGE fortune, built a world wide business employing thousands, raised scandal free, successful, hard working, family oriented children, married a super-model, decided to run for President and WON. Dude is success personified.
@@OdintheGermanShepherd I understand why you'd think Trump is a success, you're a beautiful doggo who has no ability to read. Gotta ask, what's so wonderful about marrying a supermodel? Couldn't be too great or he wouldn't have screwed around on her. He's had many bankruptcies, and daddy's money has bailed him out. But if you want to think this man is the epitome of success, that's okay. But I have one thing to say to that..NO, bad dog!
I voted for him. I won’t do it again.
In order to have a fallacy, you need to have an argument.
Some of these aren't even arguments, they're just simple utterances.
Yanick Norman All of Trump's comments support the overarching argument that he should be president.
There is no ground to argue with Trump supporters ; they either live in a world of their own, or are voluntarily inclined to distort the truth for their own interest. The end result is the same, which is no logical argument can reach them
Even though I despise Trump with all my heart, that you just said there, was an ad hominem.
+Samuelpothier Sounds just like the religious. Both non-mutually exclusive groups are awash in denial and cognitive dissonance.
Michelle Sasser how is it ad hominem?
Notice how long it takes to explain each individual logical fallacy. That's why they're so effective in business and negotiation.
because people are emotional propaganda hungry sheep.
A classical education was based on the Trivium - Grammar, Logic, and Rhetoric. Grammar is learning the mechanics of language so one can express their thoughts and experiences clearly. Logic is the mechanics of clear thinking so one can remove inherent contradictions from an argument or claim. Rhetoric is the mechanics of communicating clearly and rationally. One must first master these foundational skills for clear thinking, speaking, and making arguments. Then one is ready for the Quadrivium, which includes Math, Geometry, Music, and Astronomy. Math is basic number theory, geometry is numbers in space, music is numbers in time, astronomy is numbers in space and time. Bringing the Trivium and Quadrivium back into basic education would solve the problems with democracy in America, as the citizenry would possess the skills and intelligence necessary to prevent charlatans and demagogues from getting into elected office.
"Wisdom is worth more than silver, and gold." -Bob Marley.
He was quoting the Bible, but sure, Bob Marley said it.
9:45 "when did we beat Japan...?" OMG!!!! seriously? To me, stuff like this distracts from anything he's trying to say, because now I'm remembering how the U.S. dropped nuclear bombs on Japan instead of listening to him, and I feel like he's oblivious to reality at this point.
I think he’s talking about economic/trade deals. Context.
@@Vanirvis He is, but he also phrases the sentence "at anything" and not "in trade negotiations". Lack of historical sensibility and taste, at the least.
@@Vanirvis It's not the audiences job to discern context, it's the speakers job to formulate a cohesive statement. His wording suggests that he isn't proficient at English.
Critical thinking, folks...don't leave home without it!
This is an incredible, incredible video. Thank you so much! Your coherent explanations have inspired me to work even harder on my critical thinking and reasoning.
This is a very interesting analysis. I would love to do something like this with students.
I think starting with top 10 current events (any topic) as selected by the students would give a pretty great basis. It also would aide self analysis of their own logic thinking.
This type of lesson needs to be taught in all schools !
Dogs do not sweat. The rid their bodies of heat by panting.
Thank you SO much for this! I REALLY appreciate the discussion after each fallacy is identified. I will be relying upon you to get through the rest of my Logic class.
Who in their right mind can stand one minute of this crap he dishes out ?? Done with this .. I can't I supported this crap with money canvassing , votes .. NO MORE!!!!
I think pointing out logical fallacies is a useful exercise. Politicians from both sides rarely practice logic and reason. What’s even sadder is that now the MS media has lost all sense of being logical or reasonable.
How is your stance on the lying propaganda media that is rooting for a fascist state? Fox? Breitbart? AON?
Covfefe Dk Propaganda is propaganda regardless of source. In most cases it is fairly easy to fact check a story and ALL aides engage in spin. That’s why it’s incredibly important to research and use discernment to determine what is a fact and what isn’t. My point is that the best tools to do that were given to us by philosophy; Hume, Locke, Descartes. When one applies these principles along with research from non-biased sources, it isn’t rocket science to separate truth from fiction.
James Clary
Alas, many people have no concept of Descartes, and it would be quite unreasonable to expect them to even know who Locke is.
And to be honest, the great mystery is why so many willingly overlook lies, fraud, racism, bigotry and treason? What makes them discard traits in one man that they fiercely protest about in others?
Covfefe Dk Ignorance vis a vis “it would be unreasonable for them to know Locke” is no excuse. In any intellectual examination of ideas, a reasonable assumption is that both sides are flawed in some respect. To believe otherwise would be the highest form of simplicity. The question for me is not whether a position (whether espoused by an org like Brietbart or by an individual like AOC) has flaws. They all do. But rather which position best promulgates the positions I hold dear. Those are primarily personal liberty, equality of opportunity and unbridled freedom to do or say as we wish within the framework of the non-aggression principle.
Sure, 95% on the right, and the left is forced to do 5% or...They're finished. They can't compete. The mainstream media is very, very consistent and dependable at reporting facts. These entities are profoundly damaged or ruined when they lie. The examples are many. Now, narratives on the other hand are another story. Learn to reject the narratives. The news is there to tell us accurately what the GDP is or what Russia did to Ukraine today. The mainstream media do that ably, they are called to account, sued and put out of business when rhey don't. And I most certainly am not referring to the proudly biased right wing lie factories who can only survive by rebranding themselves as "entertainment".
Where do we learn systematically to reject false narratives? Well, college is a good place. So it is contingent upon this garbage working effectively to discredit higher learning. Which we now of course see everywhere.
You are giving sophisticated analysis of Trumps political verbal strategies. The strategy Trump uses the most is the childhood game I am rubber you are glue whatever you say goes back to you!
Thank you so much for putting this video together! It is very valuable.
I was waiting for the “I’m an asshole” fallacy.
A quick read of George Orwell's novel, 1984 will equip almost anyone with the basic tools necessary for spotting and targeting campaign propaganda and the mechanisms of mass coercion and control.
Awesome video I been analyzing trumps fallacies for a while, thanks for unmask this clown, I hope the u.s. people open their eyes and don't let this man play the bullfight with them
You missed the entire intro point that this was not a political study. This is a logical study and the absurdities exposed in logical analysis go VERY strongly in any number of political speeches.
(I would suggest that it applies in all "influencer" speeches when they are seeking to move an undecided target group.) Some call the ability to create an action in others leadership. Using tried and true tropes (valid or not) are only questioned later based on viewpoints.(opinions that may or may not themselves be based in logic)
Trump just says that there is a lot of people, wow thousands ... nothing more. How is that a fallacy. Somebody enters a room And says... hey that a lot of people... that is not a fallacy. Otherwise every word is a fallacy.
These logical fallacies are effective when dealing with an audience without any training in logic, basic reasoning, and ignorance about the world outside the US. As a European travelling in the US, I was astounded by the lack of basic understanding of the world outside the US. What compounds this is this overconfidence in the beliefs and prejudices some people have in place of knowledge. Those who know always doubt, those who know nothing are full of certainty. I wonder, what do they study in school?
Paul Makinson, America’s Educational System has been broken for decades. The fault lies with the GOP (Conservative), and Corporate Democratics, who’ve been busy with the “dumbing down of America”.
Business administration and financial planning. That's what they study.
The beginning of my crusade awaits the answers to these very questions Paul. Please let me know as soon as you figure this out... for I have "thousands" of folks willing to join me at a moments notice!!! Lol*
YEAH NO ONE GIVES A FUCK ABOUT YOUR SOCIALIST SHIT HOLE
@@c.a.savage5689 huh? In college many Americans study business, but, in high school they study useless things. Study skills, philosophy, psychology and finance are, amazingly, not taught. I would argue that those are exactly the subjects that should be taught. Interestingly, many private high schools do teach these subjects. Also, I'm hearing more and more kids saying they are getting these subjects in public school as electives, but, I think that is still the exception.
Your argument would be better if it were presented with the other side asking you questions so that the "debate" isn't superficial.
Cheat codes as a metaphor for logical fallacies... I like it! I'm going to use this in class. 👍
Politics is about persuading people. Effective mass persuasion requires rhetoric, not logic.
This is exactly why Hitler got such a huge following.
(No I am not comparing Trump to Hitler. No hasty generalizations please)
I am comparing Traitor Trump to Hitler, and it is not a hasty generalization.
It is based on the many years Trump has promoted white supremacy and promoted the non-white scapegoat.
The reason why I said I wasn't comparing is because I might get flooded with responses saying how I am wrong for thinking Trump is Hitler or whatever. I do agree with what you're saying though.
@@Traitorman..Proverbs26.11 BS - he might be one but he never talks about it I guess he thinks his voters will be less enthusiastic. Do you care that Biden will be a puppet to the Left and have on his cabinet AOC, Beto, Pocahontas etc ? Trump's communication skills and logic seem ridiculous rock-bottom for a president, that has been obvious well before he was elected. But what matters? I am only concerned that we could lose military strength and become much great of a socialist state.
@@Traitorman..Proverbs26.11 I am scared black leaders who have not much more logic than Trump.
@@TheSnapback Coward. I think that AOC is a fascist and certainly talks like one. Trump is quasi-fascist. A Biden presidency will have the love the Leftist media and will hurt our country in many ways. They never challenge crazy leftist ideas that are a beautiful ideology but have never worked anywhere. Also, Sweden’s move away from the socialist policies that almost destroyed its economy to a more market-based economy should be noted by our ignorant populace that swallows everything the media feeds them.
I don’t understand how this didn’t reach millions of views yet. What a great analysis!
PRESIDENT TRUMP 2024
The problem isn't that President Trump won't receive enough votes in 2024 to win the election. The problem is that there are people in the government from both sides,
( left & right ) who are willing to rig election, break laws, & really do just about anything in order to make sure that President Trump doesn't get reelected as President of the United States of America.
PRESIDENT TRUMP 2024
The FBI are being sued for a trillion dollars for they're mishandling of the Larry Nassar Olympic scandal.
How can " We the People " trust certain Law Enforcement Agencies here in America when it has been proven for a fact that they refuse to put they're political beliefs aside in order to accurately & honestly perform their duties while on the clock?
04/14/22
Over a dozen schools in Indiana received Islamic Type Terror threats of a bomb.
The FBI is probably the ones who sent them though.
Alot of Hoosiers are seriously questioning the authenticity of this story & how it is being presented on the Main$treamNews channels
Yet utube keeps censoring the comments regarding our questions about the FBI's involvement do to their credibility lately when it comes to putting aside their political ideas when attempting to do their job & pursuit JUSTICE.
Also comments regarding M$M's role in reporting the news & telling us the truth is being censored aswell.
We The People,
We are tired of being used as targets for the Dem's, & Rep's, to use when they are attempting to push through they're HomeLandSecurity agendas.
utube also censors people who support President Trump. I believe that utube can even manipulate the like tally on videos to make it look like something is either being supported by the people or if it is not being supported.
The purpose of manipulating the like tally should be illegal when portraying a false narrative, especially when that false narrative affects the election of the President of the United States of America.
My question is.....
How is this not restricting free speech?
Utube censors my comments all the time, they even have turned my wifi off after I left a controversial yet community guideline friendly comment.
Ive had my same TV for well over a year now and last week for some reason. When I tried to turn it on, it was a blue screen asking me if I would allow google to periodically listen in for the purpose
of me enhancing the enjoyment of my TV experience.
I tried to answer no I didnt want to give permission but the screen refused to change until I finally after a hour or so gave in and clicked I agree.
My question is......
How is this legal ?
- American Intermediary
Unfortunately, if you look around at what the Internet is being used for, you'll see what a tiny sliver is devoted to constructive thought.
Even now, June '23, there's a distressing number of folks who don't seem capable of acknowledging truth & logic have any worth or meaning. I'm 71 & fear for America with this attitude having such influence. Other than this everything is swell!
"They're not sending their best, they're not sending you."
Straw man, appeal to emotion, black or white... if logical fallacies made presidents Trump would be unbeatable.
ScienceTube they do
There just has to be a political opponent pointing them out. Instead they appeal to the same fallacies as he does.
When State-cultists invoke logic . . .
I mean if you think that what he said in that statement was untrue, you’re factually wrong.
Argumentum Ad ignorantiam .
Mexico does sends many immigrants who are perfectally a "good fit " for the American mainstream : dilligent , hardworking , complaint , innovative ( think : Mexican restaurants that have mushroomed in the last couple of decades in Mexican majority cities and neighbourhoods ) .
Albeit , it could be argued that south Americans ( Hispanics and Latinos ) do suffer at the hands of stereotypical media tropes ( like being a janitor, drug peddler , prison inmate ) , it could be argued that a vast majority of second or third generation South Americans are quite assimilated to the American mainstream .
Therefore. , trumps rhetoric that "all mexicans / latinos / Hispanics " are blue -collar , low I Q. , Peasants who are fleeing drug war and depressions in their own country and transforming the socio -cultural landscape of U.S.A . Is at the verry least uninformed or verry incorrect.
"when did we beat japan at anything??" uhh.. 1945? Hiroshima?
Trump's campaign success says more about a lack of critical thinking in American politics than it says about any real skill with language and political rhetoric.
It is still incomprehensible to me that anyone could listen to this man for more than three minutes and not think one is trapped in a cartoon, at a cartoon campaign rally, listening to a cartoon tyrant.
"Its so nice of you guys to show up"
OMG THAT IS A FALLACY HES THANKING HIS SUPPORTERS CALL THE POLICE
One of his false premises is that life is a zero sum game at which 'our' side can only succeed by 'beating' 'their' side into failure. Often we are all more successful by working together.
It would be an excellent time for a Part 2 on this topic
The US actually edges out Japan on the International Innovation Index, a particularly impressive feat when you consider that the US is around 3 times larger than Japan (smaller countries tend to do better on the III. China, a technological leader by all accounts, is ranked 27. Singapore is of course ranked first, as it is both small and industrious, and South Korea second for the same reasons, but Switzerland, Iceland, Ireland, and Finland are also all ranked above the US).
The US has industrial and innovation diversity, while all the countries you mentioned have (for the most part) myopic industrial and innovation focus. When you focus all your efforts on 1 thing, you're probably going to lead at that 1 thing. So, I ask you, which is better. To be the best at only the innovation index and mediocre at everything else... or... be really good at many things? (It's subjective, but...)
Have you considered the fact that the US is also the worlds largest importer of foreign researchers, while a country such as Japan has extreemly low numbers ?
Not to mention a couple of nukes after which USA won over Japan in ww2.
@@teknoaija1762 Payback's a B@tch isn't it?! But we're friends now for a while... so, let's keep it that way.
@@teknoaija1762 BINGO!
Holy moly. He used so many fallacies in less than 1 minute of his speech
I'm glad you working these pictures done from videos and you're the ones bringing them out because I don't think I would had the stomach
I'm actually watching this from Uruguay :-)
Marcos 989 Perhaps you should watch the video.
Marcos 989 I thought you were just trolling, sorry. No and no, then. I've been on the internet since the late 90's and Uruguay has an impressively good connectivity, albeit a bit expensive when you want access to high bandwidths; other than that, free wifi in most populated areas.
@Marcos 989 red herring, the deaths in Brazil have nothing to do with this
OMG. I was just about to add a comment to say "ad hominem". You sir are the first person I have ever heard say this word! It makes me happy to hear. Also it reminds me of the time in my life that I learned the word paradigm, but mispronounced it for quite a while as "pear-uuh-dig-em". (Having only encountered both words in written text)
I have to use the term quite often in online arguments, unfortunately.
you have never head ad hominem? really? does your cave have bad tv reception?
A teaching colleague sent me the link to this video for possible use in class (among other courses, I teach introduction to philosophy). As far as I can see, there are a number of errors in it regarding the fallacies. The narrator of the video actually identifies 18 alleged instances of logical fallacies. In the order in which they are identified in the narration, they are: Bandwagon; False Cause; Black or White; Loaded Question; Anecdotal; Fallacy; Strawman; Appeal to Emotion; Appeal to Emotion; Slippery Slope; Circular Reasoning; Black or White; Appeal to Authority; Genetic Fallacy; Composition; Common Sense; Black or White; Personal Incredulity. But, again, as far as I can see, the narrator is correct about only seven of those (1, 8, 9, 11, 12, 16, 17); and in two of the seven (11 & 12), the explanations as to why it is an example of that fallacy are not entirely correct.
I agree. The slippery slope fallacy seemed like a stretch. In a few of these sections Trump appears to be making claims rather than making arguments.
OK, but why wouldn't a candidate making claims also be considered an argument for why he is a better choice? That is the whole purpose of him getting up to that mic in the first place. The whole speech is an argument for why we should vote for him.
That is the subtext, but its never stated as an argument, therefore it is not a logical fallacy.
When a candidate gives a speech they talk about the issues they care about, and about their policies, goals and aspirations. If these match up closely with your values then you should vote for them.
If Trump had said "everybody knows America isn't great anymore," then that would be a real appeal to popularity. What does he mean by great? Why should we believe the crowd? Aren't statistics a better metric? This is an informal logical fallacy because he is making a truth claim "America isn't great anymore," and he backs it up with an appeal to the crowd "everybody knows." Whereas, simply making claims - even false claims, isn't fallacious.
Mark Lowe I don’t see why this would be problematic. Teaching why some argument is identified as a fallacy incorrectly or that the reason backing up a correctly identified fallacy is not sound is still instructional.
We need more videos like this the American people deserve to know who is manipulating them
It at least serves as a sign post in history. A warning to future generations
Amazing to watch this in 2023 and there are STILL millions and millions of Americans who believe all his lies!
15 Logical Fallacies in 22 Minutes 38 seconds.
Trump said the fallacies in a 3 minute period
Understood. Thanks.
Right it takes 22 minutes to point out fallacies in 3 minutes. Imagine the sleepless media fact checkers covering Trump.
easily misleading title though, i was looking forward to this video but im too tired to watch for 22mins.
Don't try and justify it. You know that was a click-bait title and it was done on purpose.
Hello, I am using this for my thesis about critical thinking in English lessons. Really well done, thank you so much, I truly appreciate it.
great choice!!
My thesis or "passing thought" is that anyone speaking positively about Trump under this video will have noticably poor language skills.
No doubt I will get funding for such vital research
"Sweat like dogs....."? 🤦♂️
Dogs literally DO NOT sweat.
🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
We, non-narcissists know this.
We live in interesting times. 🇺🇸
Hmm, I just realized that I was taught logical fallacies as marketing strategies in my high school business class...
His success doesn’t speak volumes about the power of language rather about the average IQ of US voters.
HarryGuit and yet your country can’t defend itself and you leach off the rest of the world
bandr no tired of supporting losers like you
bandr well your a demoncrap so you are guilty of supporting slavery, you assume that people will not call you out on your guilt, slaver you are wrong - we should sell demoncraps to American Africans that should balance the scales
bandr I know your a slaver otherwise I would get no argument / and I guess I should thank a teacher #boycottsocialistteachers
@@clawrence66 wow, u managed fall for quite a few fallacies there, despite the video explaining that stuff, GJ
I think that misinformation along with baseless allegations deserves a seat at the table.
Having watched the video the whole way through now, there are enough big
problems and misunderstandings of the subject that I'll go through the
rest of the problems one by one:
The second critique does point out a really egregiously fallacious
argument. However, false cause isn't a specific type of logical fallacy,
and I would personally say the fallacy committed doesn't actually fall
into the false cause category, but rather is a slippery slope fallacy.
The argument follows along the lines of "they failed to prepare in this
small way for a debate, therefore they would have failed (to prepare
adequately) in leading a war". Though in your defense, you could make an
argument that it's jumping to conclusions, which is a false cause. As
you say, his argument there is really just a mess.
When you point out the fallacy fallacy at around 11 minutes, this is somewhat confusing, as it isn't critiquing something Trump did, but something that the view MAY have done. I definitely think it's worth mentioning, but putting it up there in the same format as the ones you're laying at Trump's feet is somewhat confusing.
For what you claim is a strawman argument: it's pretty questionable to call it a strawman. His argument is actually so vague as to be entirely meaningless here, but it is mostly a loaded question with a bit of Black and White thrown in. The real insidiousness of the argument is that to address it at all by either, coming up with something that he could discount as "not really winning" or by asking him to clarify what he means by winning, which he would spin to sound like you were prevaricating because you couldn't give an example of winning at the boarder, would make you appear weak and let him declare victory. Making it so vague could be called simplifying the argument, but that doesn't make it a strawman.
What you identify as a slippery slope just isn't one. Slippery slopes are spurious predictions about the future, and cannot exist in the past tense. Because it deals with a known outcome, it would be a false cause of some kind. In this case, he's employing the cum hoc or post hoc fallacy. It depends on how long he believes we've been being "beat" at the boarder.
For circular reasoning: it just isn't there. It's not even really implied. It's really just flattery. The implied reason for saying they're the best and brightest is because they agree with him, which is sort of an appeal to authority, but it would only be circular reasoning if it also claimed that he derived that authority from them agreeing with them: "They're the best and brightest because they agree with me- I'm right because the best and brightest agree with me". The actual content here doesn't explicitly or implicity supply a reason as to why Trump is right, let alone one that points back to the beginning. Without a circle there's no circular reasoning.
The Mexico selecting people to send across the boarder is actually a pretty good example of a strawman. You should have used this as the example of a strawman. The Black and White thing before it isn't a very strong example, especially because of his backtrack to "some, I assume, are good people".
I know some of this stuff sounds kinda petty. For the most part your critiques are fair and reasonably accurate. I only say reasonably because there are often multiple fallacies at play simultaneously but I understand you go only for the most prominent for the sake of clarity. If you are educating, you need to try to be as accurate and clear as possible, and in the cases above you fall short of both.
''Some, I assume are good people'' is still a black and white example. It implies that there are good and bad people. No in between.
tangentcausality dude, yo you're a butthole.
logic as an analysis tool does ultimately fail as it is an abstraction, an oversimplification. When you say the arguments are illogical, it is a non sequitor, it does not follow, that he can’t lead. The fact that he DOESN’T CHOOSE to make a “logical” argument does not mean he CANNOT make a “logical” argument. Just because someone is logical, it does not follow that the person won’t stab you in the back. Who can you trust? The person who will do anything for you, who will lay down their life for you, who will say any crazy thing to you that pops into his head. He is unveiled, transparent, authentic. People like that, people vote for that. Its refreshing. Besides, nobody can lead, and anybody can lead. Its irrelevant. The real question is: who will follow?
@@gustercc You an your Ad Hominem Fallacies, haha!
@@gustercc I believe that's an ad hominem attack.
I just watched this again after two years. It is still as relevant and still depicts the tre45onous reptile perfectly.
If anything it's more valid now.
Trump and language!
He can't string a sensible sentence together.
Actually I am watching this for my distance college and our theme is Logical Fallacies.
I find it hilarious that my class watched this video of trump to learn about logical fallacies 😂
Never bought it,perhaps due to my step father who is also a sociopath ,used the same tools.
Love the breakdown. Marvelous and to the point.
The very first "fallacy" presented here is used oddly, as Trump wasn't even making an argument but stating his opinion about the crowd.
Yes, Trump did not appeal to his popularity in that particular instance, but I believe that one should drae every posible instance where the listener may draw fallacious conclussions, despute the fact that they are not being stated.
@ I do not endorse Trump, at all. I wast just stating that the argument was not explicit.
Quick clarification, "Ad Hominems" aren't insults, so calling you an "Idiot" isn't actually an Ad Hominem. It's when you take something FACTUAL about the person (the hominem part) to use as a rebuttal as their argument. Example a German citizen lectures us on the benefits of socialized welfare mixed with capitalistic welfare and I attack him by saying "He's totally wrong, he's German for Christ's sake, what does he know about socialism in the U.S"? Using the fact that he's German doesn't make him wrong, I attacked his character. Calling him an "ldiot" doesn't actually make it true just cause I'm mad at him. Maybe he's a genius?
lmaooo I'm doing a paper for my grade 12 philosophy course and this video is a gold mine thank you so much. It's exactly what my paper is on and I'm gonna keep it strictly on Donald Trump
I grew up in LA and a philosophy course was not offered at my school. What city do you live that offers a philosophy course in high school? I would rather know the school but that may be too personal information for a RUclips comment.
Jacob Lee I’m Canadian and went to a catholic school!
@@brockobama257 You have better chances on learning from RUclips than from an institution.
I can't wait to vote for Trump again, because they forced a transgender into Hogwarts Legacy.
trump = meme+falacy generator
Yeah, that was really kind-hearted of you to attack the man. That's called " the ad hominem" attack.
Trump would say, who says it's a logical fallacy? Anyone can make up crap and call it anything they want. In a court of law, if you tried to point out logical fallacies the other side was using, you would get laughed out of court. Logical falacies are a bunch of BS.
"When did we beat Japan at anything?" Well Donald, we definitely won the nuclear bomb dropping contest 2 to 0. I don't believe this is a loaded question. It's just a really stupid one.
Not strictly true. His "we" is the United States. Yours is the Allied Forces. I'm not aware of anytime that the US by itself has defeated anyone, except itself in the Civil War. One could argue the "Indian Wars" if one was willing to acknowledge that shameful pogrom of deceit and betrayal as a war. Even the creation of the weapon which brought about the Japanese surrender was largely due to the participation of European scientists.
That’s complicated. The bombs very likely only ended the war slightly sooner. The Soviet Union entered the war on the same day as the atomic bomb based on agreements put into place by the Allies. The Japanese were ready to surrender but just wanted to preserve the Emperor, the center of Shintoism, which happened anyway. The Japanese preferred being primarily accepting an American defeat as opposed to Soviet troops on the ground. The US was preparing for conflict with the Soviet Union and vice versa. They were very likely dropped more so because of the diplomatic leverage it gave to the US against the Soviet Union in addition to racism, incentives to justify war spending, and anger over Pearl Harbor. See Alperovitz’s book titled Atomic Diplomacy.
"He find himself hard-pressed to piece together a sound political argument." That's definitely one of the better characterizations of Donald Trump that I've heard.
This whole video should be broadcast on the major network evening news.
Trump's whole brain is a fallacy
This did not age well...
I thought I loved my English Literature Honors class, scored the A, until the following semester when taking English Critical Thinking, only got a B+, however, it's still harder to remember how to write a definition paper, than to remember all those fallacies that I could then rattle off as friends, family, and snotty teachers that couldn't debate their way out of a, you guessed it, a wet paper bag.
Non Sequitur was my favorite fallacy as a freshman to call folks out on.
It was like they were cheating, conversationally speaking. As a Sophomore, my fave was
Ad Hominem.
It was a natural progression: as a result of all the non-sequiturs they traded for ad Hominem attacks upon me.
That's not an illogical fallacy.🤐
Though I am not particularly fond of Trump, so do I want to point out that the first fallacy you mention, does not really hold water since he only stated there were many people. He never said anything about his candidacy being justified because of it. It can be taken as just a blank statement. That is at least my impression of it
I that was the first thing I noticed. Ironically I'm probably going to have to throw this baby out with the bathwater and find another video on fallacies that doesn't blow it on its first try.
It's still not a fallacy in this context. If he actually used it to try to argue a point, then sure.
In the specific context of the video, Trump is only stating a fact. But generally speaking, he does use this observation as a mean to bolster his credibility --- just not in this specific instance, which the analyst should have identified as so.
Notwithstanding, it's a fallacy fallacy to assume that a mistake entirely poison the other points.
Trust me, I'm an Engineer You're smart:)
LegoGuy87 You’re assuming that, you just made a false cause.
4:23 video starts here you're welcome