SnokenKeekaGuard@lemmy.dbzer0.com to Lemmy Shitpost@lemmy.world · 9 months agoIf you like pina coladas, you might also like walks in the rainlemmy.dbzer0.comimagemessage-square148fedilinkarrow-up11.38Karrow-down127
arrow-up11.35Karrow-down1imageIf you like pina coladas, you might also like walks in the rainlemmy.dbzer0.comSnokenKeekaGuard@lemmy.dbzer0.com to Lemmy Shitpost@lemmy.world · 9 months agomessage-square148fedilink
minus-squareTimewornTraveler@lemm.eelinkfedilinkarrow-up1arrow-down2·9 months agocan i get a citation (since we’re debate lording) on what constitutes a “valid” argument and how this fits into that category?
minus-squarebort@feddit.delinkfedilinkarrow-up1·edit-29 months agoClassical philosophy used it often, The earlier dialogues of Plato (424–348 BCE), relating the discourses of Socrates, raised the use of reductio arguments to a formal dialectical method (elenchus), also called the Socratic method. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reductio_ad_absurdum If you want a more modern source, here is a lecture on the topic: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Iepg5Q4rBAQ&list=PLPnZfvKID1Sje5jWxt-4CSZD7bUI4gSPS&index=53 I can recommend the entire lecture. It’s both entertaining and valuable.
can i get a citation (since we’re debate lording) on what constitutes a “valid” argument and how this fits into that category?
Classical philosophy used it often,
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reductio_ad_absurdum
If you want a more modern source, here is a lecture on the topic: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Iepg5Q4rBAQ&list=PLPnZfvKID1Sje5jWxt-4CSZD7bUI4gSPS&index=53
I can recommend the entire lecture. It’s both entertaining and valuable.