Navigation

If the World was “Gluten-Free”, would Wheat-Growing Nations be Economically Crippled?

What’s the logical fallacy where you argue for a false conclusion that wouldn’t even follow from your premises if your unrelated evidence happened to be true (but isn’t) and your methodology wouldn’t distinguished truth from falsehood even if it were carried out correctly (but wasn’t)?

Does anyone know enough Latin to help me locate the proper name for this level of mental corruption?

See on brighterbrains.org

Author Description

Louie Helm is a Machine Learning Engineer

9 Responses to “If the World was “Gluten-Free”, would Wheat-Growing Nations be Economically Crippled?”

  2. December 13

    Michael Witbrock

    “religio”?

  3. December 13

    Jesse Galef

    Fractally Iniuriam (using Google translate)

  4. December 13

    Tony Parisi

    Ignoratio elenchi and non-sequitur, although the fact that the premises and conclusion are false has nothing to do with the validity of the argument. Also, in the classical sense of ignoratio elenchi, it would just be that.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ignoratio_elenchi

  5. December 13

    Robby Bensinger

    argumentum nefandum

  7. December 13

    Desiree D. Dudley

    Yeah, three things going on here.

  8. December 13

    Louie Helm

    “the fact that the premises and conclusion are false has nothing to do with the validity of the argument”… true… lol

  9. December 13

    Misha Gurevich

    Fractal idiocy