The Hundred Years’ War on Palestine
A History of Settler Colonial Conquest and Resistance, 1917-2017 by Rashid Khalidi
A landmark history of one hundred years of war waged against the Palestinians from the foremost US historian of the Middle East, told through pivotal events and family history.
@Kirilov @KarunaX @ymishory @appassionato @bookstodon @palestine What am I not getting here? Study at advanced academy isn’t trustworthy simply because a large number of people say so. If anything, the position that high education isn’t trustworthy has lately become a rather popular argumentum ad populum…
@gimulnautti @Kirilov @KarunaX @ymishory @appassionato @bookstodon @palestine My point is they don’t address the actual arguement. They address the person making it. It’s also an appeal to accomplishment. By addressing the context and not the point, this interlocutor is engaging in sophistry and not dialogue. Logical fallacies are tools to understand when someone is hijacking our emotions
@Kirilov @gimulnautti @KarunaX @ymishory @appassionato @bookstodon @palestine
It seems logical to me to expect solid work from someone known for producing solid work, and I see no fallacy here.
@Alexandrad1 @Kirilov @gimulnautti @KarunaX @ymishory @appassionato @bookstodon @palestine Then go read the wiki or stanford philosophy encyclopedia entry for logical fallacies. These are textbook examples.
@Kirilov @gimulnautti @KarunaX @ymishory @appassionato @bookstodon @palestine
These textbook examples do not apply here, for the reason I mentioned.
@Alexandrad1 @Kirilov @gimulnautti @KarunaX @ymishory @appassionato @bookstodon @palestine “An argument from authority, also called an appeal to authority, or argumentum ad verecundiam, is a form of argument in which the opinion of an influential figure is used as evidence to support an argument.
All sources agree this is not a valid form of logical proof, that is to say, that this is a logical fallacy”
@Kirilov @Alexandrad1 @gimulnautti @KarunaX @ymishory @appassionato @bookstodon @palestine
Argumentum ad populum and fallacy of authority are not the same, you pompous prick.
You are making general opinions on a book you haven’t read, based only in your inability to grasp the title.
3.You wouldn’t call a book titled “History of World War 2” biased. Why do you call a book that tells the story of the 100 years resistance to colonialism in Palestine biased? It was a war, by any definition
@argumento @Kirilov @Alexandrad1 @gimulnautti @KarunaX @ymishory @appassionato @bookstodon @palestine They both apply. I have absolutely read Khalidi. It’s a fine text but that is not what we are talking about here. We are talking about logical fallacies.
@Kirilov @argumento @gimulnautti @KarunaX @ymishory @appassionato @bookstodon @palestine
Yes, and saying you expect a rigorous work from an historian with good academic credentials is not a logical fallacy.
If we followed your logic, we should discard all opinions coming from experts renowned in their particular field, because that would be an appeal to authority.
Basing one’s assessment on solid work is not the same as citing a public figure with no expert knowledge on the issue.
@Kirilov
Uh, no. You’ve excluded the most important part:
>(…) of someone who is taken to be an authority but is not really an authority.
- Standford page that you’ve linked.
The definition you took from Wikipedia actually does not reflect its source.
<If (…) we try to [impress the reader] with a famous name or by appealing to a supposed authority who really isn’t much of an expert, (…)
- Uni of NC
@Alexandrad1 @gimulnautti @KarunaX@mastodon.world @ymishory @appassionato @bookstodon @palestine
@wrack @Kirilov @Alexandrad1 @gimulnautti @ymishory @appassionato @palestine Did you read the next sentence? “Similarly, when there is controversy, and authorities are divided, it is an error to base one’s view on the authority of just some of them” That is what was happening here. There was controversy about the proper application of terms and someone made an appeal to Khalidi’s credentials to try and win
@Kirilov @wrack @gimulnautti @ymishory @appassionato @palestine
Yes, I did. Why? You wish to change the subject and discuss confirmation bias now?
@Alexandrad1 @Kirilov @gimulnautti @KarunaX @ymishory @appassionato @bookstodon @palestine Yes - these logical fallacies do obviously apply here.
@Kirilov @gimulnautti @KarunaX @ymishory @appassionato @bookstodon @palestine
If they did, you could easily demonstrate it, since it’s logic, instead of just claiming there is a logical fallacy.
Karuna said he expected a rigorous work, because the author is known to produce rigorous work. That’s perfect logic.
@Kirilov @gimulnautti @ymishory @appassionato @bookstodon @palestine Rubbish. Absolute rubbish. It seems you have been captured by a love for the rules of logic, but have (illogically) misapplied these.
@KarunaX @Kirilov @gimulnautti @ymishory @appassionato @palestine How have they been misapplied?