Soaring Gas Prices

[Mister_T]

Let's all talk about ways to save gasoline!

No SUV's.

 

[Mister_T]

Great ideas. I was going to stop smoking when cigerettes reached a dollar a pack. :sad4:

I'm not so sure 4 dollar gas will slow folks down. Americans have a love affair with their car. We say we need to make all these trips, but I have but one question.

Why don't very many people commute to work in other cities by plane?

The only problem I see with planes is the time it takes for security checkpoints.

 

[Aqualung]

Could have fooled me.

What?

 

[Aqualung]

2. drive the speed limit. I did this and I get an extra 4-5 miles per gallon.

Actually, you get best gas mileage at 55, which is usually speeding or going too slow. If you accelarate less rapidly though (which is something one might do if they were driving slower) it would help save gas. Just FYI.

 

[Aqualung]

Greetings from Spokane!

Hey, that's where I am!

 

[Mister_T]

What?

SoyLeche and I are not in agreement on this issue in any way, shape or form.

 

[Aqualung]

SoyLeche and I are not in agreement on this issue in any way, shape or form.

Oh. I was under the impression that you both thought the government was to blame (because you flat out stated it, and SoyLeche has demonstrated that it's not exxon) but were in disagreement of the culpability and solutions. But, I guess not. Doesn't mean you shouldn't vote libertarian, though.

 

[Mister_T]

Oh. I was under the impression that you both thought the government was to blame (because you flat out stated it, and SoyLeche has demonstrated that it's not exxon) but were in disagreement of the culpability and solutions. But, I guess not. Doesn't mean you shouldn't vote libertarian, though.

Either Exxon or the government is to blame. I guess we'll find out which one it is this fall when congress releases their probe results. Although I'm sure somebody will find someway to show that neither are to blame.

I'll have to do more research on libertarians. I have no idea what category I fall into with politics at the moment.

 

[SoyLeche]

Either Exxon or the government is to blame.

There's a false dichotomy if I've ever seen one.

 

[Mister_T]

There's a false dichotomy if I've ever seen one.

Compelling argument. :clap

 

[Reverend Rick]

The only problem I see with planes is the time it takes for security checkpoints.

Perhaps the expense makes it prohibitive?

 

[Reverend Rick]

I'm saying that the day of long commutes are just about over.

 

[SoyLeche]

Compelling argument. :clap

That wasn't me making an argument. It was me pointing out a fallacy.

 

[Mister_T]

That wasn't me making an argument. It was me pointing out a fallacy.

A fallacy to which you have no rebuttal to other than "it's wrong."

And you were making an argument despite your own twisting of definitions.

ar·gu·ment
–noun 1.an oral disagreement; verbal opposition; contention; altercation: a violent argument. 2.a discussion involving differing points of view; debate: They were deeply involved in an argument about inflation. 3.a process of reasoning; series of reasons: I couldn't follow his argument. 4.a statement, reason, or fact for or against a point: This is a strong argument in favor of her theory. 5.an address or composition intended to convince or persuade; persuasive discourse. 6.subject matter; theme: The central argument of his paper was presented clearly. 7.an abstract or summary of the major points in a work of prose or poetry, or of sections of such a work. 8.Mathematics. a.an independent variable of a function. b.Also called amplitude. the angle made by a given vector with the reference axis. c.the angle corresponding to a point representing a given complex number in polar coordinates. Compare principal argument. 9.Computers. a variable in a program, to which a value will be assigned when the program is run: often given in parentheses following a function name and used to calculate the function. 10.Obsolete. a.evidence or proof. b.a matter of contention

Familiarize yourself with the English language. It will come in handy when participating in a debate forum.

 

[SoyLeche]

A fallacy to which you have no rebuttal to other than "it's wrong."

And you were making an argument despite your own twisting of definitions.



Familiarize yourself with the English language. It will come in handy when participating in a debate forum.

Your statement included a logical fallacy. I pointed it out. The fact that your statement was a fallacy is not a matter of opinion. Your statement is a textbook example of a "false dichotomy".

Either add a few more premisses to your argument or get over it.

I didn't even say your fallacy is "wrong". It is merely a fallacy. There is really no argument to be made on that fact.

 

[Mister_T]

Your statement included a logical fallacy. I pointed it out. The fact that your statement was a fallacy is not a matter of opinion. Your statement is a textbook example of a "false dichotomy".

Either add a few more premisses to your argument or get over it.

I didn't even say your fallacy is "wrong". It is merely a fallacy. There is really no argument to be made on that fact.

Until you can prove me wrong, it is a matter of opinion. It's not a false dichotomy just because you say so nor is it a fact because you say so. Your statements are a textbook example of someone who has nothing productive to further contribute to a debate.

I have added all the premisses I need. I feel that there is evidence of price gouging. So does Congress. You refusal to accept those things as possibly being true in light of the evidence is your own choice.

And calling my statement a fallacy is indeed calling it "wrong.

wrong –adjective
1.not in accordance with what is morally right or good: a wrong deed.
2.deviating from truth or fact; erroneous: a wrong answer.
3.not correct in action, judgment, opinion, method, etc., as a person; in error: You are wrong to blame him.
4.not proper or usual; not in accordance with requirements or recommended practice: the wrong way to hold a golf club.
5.out of order; awry; amiss: Something is wrong with the machine.
6.not suitable or appropriate: He always says the wrong thing.
7.(of clothing) that should be worn or kept inward or under: You're wearing the sweater wrong side out.
–noun
8.that which is wrong, or not in accordance with morality, goodness, or truth; evil: I committed many wrongs.
9.an injustice: The wrongs they suffered aged them.
10.Law. a.an invasion of another's right, to his damage. b.a tort.
–adverb
11.in a wrong manner; not rightly; awry; amiss: You did it wrong again.
–verb (used with object)
12.to do wrong to; treat unfairly or unjustly; harm.
13.to impute evil to (someone) unjustly; malign.
—Idioms
14.get in wrong, Slang. to cause to come into disfavor: We are forever getting in wrong with the people next door.
15.go wrong, a.to go amiss; fail: Everything is going wrong today. b.to pursue an immoral course; become depraved: Bad friends caused him to go wrong.
16.in the wrong, to blame; in error: He knew he was in the wrong but refused to concede the point.

English is your friend.

 

[Mister_T]

So I can see the post.

 

[Aqualung]

Until you can prove me wrong, it is a matter of opinion. It's not a false dichotomy just because you say so nor is it a fact because you say so.

ROFL. He was just pointing out a logical fallacy. Now that you know that something might be a logical fallacy, you can either revise your position or continue to debate from it. Depending on what you do, you will either retain credibility or lose it entirely.

From the all mighty wikipedia:

The formal fallacy of false dilemma—also known as false choice, false dichotomy, falsified dilemma, fallacy of the excluded middle, black and white thinking, false correlative, either/or fallacy and bifurcation—involves a situation in which two alternative statements are held to be the only options, when in reality there exist one or more other options which have not been considered. The two alternatives presented are often, though not always, the two extreme points on some spectrum. Instead of such extreme simplification and wishful thinking, considering the whole spectrum, as in fuzzy logic, may be more appropriate. A typical false dilemma is the assertion "You are either for us or you are against us." The fallacy of this type of argument is that it tries to eliminate the middle ground.

The false dilemma fallacy refers to misuse of the or operator. For misuse of the and operator, see package-deal fallacy.

In order for you statement "It is either the oil companies or the government", you have to create some more statements. Your statement ought to be a conclusion to a number of premises. For example, "It is not due to supply and demand (and a number of premises to prove that conclusion", "nor is it due to a combination of the two", etc. You have not addressed my supply and demand comments at all, so at the very least that one choice was conveniently ignored, creating a false dichotomy.

 

[SoyLeche]

Until you can prove me wrong, it is a matter of opinion. It's not a false dichotomy just because you say so nor is it a fact because you say so. Your statements are a textbook example of someone who has nothing productive to further contribute to a debate.

I have added all the premisses I need. I feel that there is evidence of price gouging. So does Congress. You refusal to accept those things as possibly being true in light of the evidence is your own choice.

And calling my statement a fallacy is indeed calling it "wrong.

English is your friend.

A fallacy isn't necessarily wrong - it just isn't logically sound. You may very well be correct that it is either Exxon or the Govt. The reason that it is a fallacy is that it may also be OPEC, China, the consumer, random chance, global warming, or any number of other things. That is why it is a false dichotomy. Look it up. You seem to be good at posting irrelevant definitions - try looking up a relevant one.

I have a feeling you think I am talking about your entire argument. I'm not. I'm talking about one fallacious statement.

Also, "Congress" doesn't necesarily think there is evidence - "a member of Congress" does. And I have never said that I don't accept that they are possibly true. I've said that it isn't a foregone conclusion that they are true.

 

[SoyLeche]

"nor is it due to a combination of the two",

I'm not sure what the "either" does, but saying "Exxon or the government" does not exclude the possibility that it is a combination of the two, does it?

Actually, I think there are probably differing views on this. In the logic course I took "or" did not exclude "and", or something like that.