The usual fallacy I see often is of that family: - there are possibility that X is false/fake/artifact - thus sure X is is false/fake/artifact
there is the symmetrical believers equivalent, possible-> true 2014-02-14 18:33 GMT+01:00 Jed Rothwell <jedrothw...@gmail.com>: > Eric Walker <eric.wal...@gmail.com> wrote: > > From the website: "A person's interests and circumstances have no bearing >>> on the truth or falsity of the claim being made. While a person's interests >>> will provide them with motives to support certain claims, the claims stand >>> or fall on their own." >>> >> >> In a strict sense, this is true. But people are inherently intuitive, >> and intuition goes beyond cut-and-dry logic. . . . >> > > > >> It is (or should be) a logical fallacy to hew too strictly to whether a >> conclusion is based on a logical fallacy. >> > > This is not quite right. What you are saying is that when a person makes > an assertion X, such that if the public believed X this would benefit that > person, we have reason to doubt the assertion. The person may be lying, > because people often lie in their own interests. The person has a motive to > lie. So it would be wise to check the veracity of the statement. > > That is not a logical fallacy. The fallacy would be to state that: "we > know this is a lie because it serves the speaker's best interests." That > would only be true if people invariably, automatically lied whenever it was > in their best interest to do so. We know they do not. > > - Jed > >
