We just need “If C then D” to chain A to D since the comment up top didn’t mention it . Oh, I think I see a problem here. In the us with leaders we constantly have “D and not C,” and even worse than the not C’s are the nazis. Ok, I’ll stop.
B doesn’t inherently mean C is correct, there’s just very strong correlation. It’s useful for quickly guessing, not for actual in-depth analysis. Though, the US did really love the Nazis for a good while, still does.
Yes that makes sense. The premises are too shaky for the argument to be sound despite the valid structure (which the commenter did not use and I pulled out of my ass).
I was mainly writing it out as an exercise to myself but left it because it kinda worked as a joke lol
Could you clarify why it’s not good reasoning?Argument:
We just need “If C then D” to chain A to D since the comment up top didn’t mention it . Oh, I think I see a problem here. In the us with leaders we constantly have “D and not C,” and even worse than the not C’s are the nazis. Ok, I’ll stop.
B doesn’t inherently mean C is correct, there’s just very strong correlation. It’s useful for quickly guessing, not for actual in-depth analysis. Though, the US did really love the Nazis for a good while, still does.
Yes that makes sense. The premises are too shaky for the argument to be sound despite the valid structure (which the commenter did not use and I pulled out of my ass).
I was mainly writing it out as an exercise to myself but left it because it kinda worked as a joke lol
I do very much appreciate an earnest answer.
No problem!