The Texas Sharpshooter Fallacy | Idea Channel | PBS Digital Studios
Vložit
- čas přidán 6. 01. 2015
- Viewers like you help make PBS (Thank you 😃) . Support your local PBS Member Station here: to.pbs.org/donateidea
Tweet us! bit.ly/pbsideachanneltwitter
Idea Channel Facebook! bit.ly/pbsideachannelfacebook
Talk about this episode on reddit! bit.ly/pbsideachannelreddit
Idea Channel IRC! bit.ly/pbsideachannelirc
Email us! pbsideachannel [at] gmail [dot] com
Become better at arguing! We dive into the Texas Sharpshooter Fallacy and show you who to avoid it.
Watch the entire Fallacy playlist:
bit.ly/1wpuCcU
ASSETS:
:27
• You Are Not So Smart: ...
:44
mikeurbonas.com/2010/12/02/slo...
2:08
tribalinsight.wordpress.com/20...
2:30
• stupid white man hit b...
------------------------------------------------------------------
MUSIC:
"Europe" by Roglok (www.roglok.net)
"Level 5" by Room for the Homeless (bit.ly/10N0Ykm)
"Bouncy Castle" by Roglok (www.roglok.net)
":P" by Roglok (www.roglok.net)
"Squarehead" by Roglok (www.roglok.net)
"Number Cruncher" by Roglok (www.roglok.net)
"Little Birthday Acid" by Roglok (www.roglok.net)
"Topskore" by Roglok (www.roglok.net)
"Anti Vanishing Spray" by Roglok (www.roglok.net)
"Tarty Prash" by Roglok (www.roglok.net)
"Carry on Carillon" by Roglok (www.roglok.net)
"Uptown Tennis Club" by Roglok (www.roglok.net)
"Squarehead" by Roglok (www.roglok.net)
"Dream Of Autumn" by Night Shift Master
/ dj-darkmatter-. .
"Insert Toy For Coin" by Eatme (eatme.pro/music/)
"Dizor" by Outsider
www.jamendo.com/en/artist/440...
"Lets go back to the rock" by Outsider
www.jamendo.com/en/artist/440...
"Something like this" by Outsider
www.jamendo.com/en/artist/440...
-------------------------------------------------------------------
TRANSLATE THINGS @ ideachannel.subtitl.us
Hosted by Mike Rugnetta (@mikerugnetta)
Made by Kornhaber Brown (www.kornhaberbrown.com)
Want some more Idea Channel?
YULE TUBE!
• YULE TUBE! | Idea Chan...
Coffee, Mesmerism, and Morning Routines
• Coffee, Mesmerism, and...
Is Over the Garden Wall About Having Faith?
• Is Over The Garden Wal...
How Mighty is Taylor Swift's Pen?
• How Mighty is Taylor S...
Mars is a better planet to live in, why?
If you look at the percentajes, 100% of human deaths occur in Earth while Mars holds the 0% percent of human deaths.
lol
It’s hard to get there as well, and the climate is poor on the downside; but there’s also lots of room and some very nice scenery-have you seen those photos?-if we can overcome the transport problem, it might be very spacious. It’s also very exclusive-just the place to marry a trophy husband or wife!
I'd like to die on Mars, just not on impact.
Mike just used the Texas Sharpshooter Fallacy to illustrate The Texas Sharpshooter Fallacy. Maybe it was just your own sneaky brain leading you astraw, Mike.
"astraw" I see what you did there
Man, I'm glad somebody did. ;) I was afraid my terrible pun had just gone over everybody's head.
Geahk Burchill Nice fallacy fallacy.
Yep, my thoughts exactly as I saw this. I'm glad not only yours but several other comments here caught it. Not only Texas sharpshooter but confirmation bias as well. She (he) must be the star of "logical arguments" for femminists.
Albert, nice "fallacy fallacy" fallacy
I really appreciate these fallacy explanations, not so much because I expect somebody I argue with might magically see a fallacy that I may(or may not!) have noticed, but because clear, concise definitions on how I should order my thoughts logically is generally a great reminder to have. Thanks much.
Note about the Texas Sharpshooter Fallacy, and it's interactions with the Fallacy Fallacy:
Points used in Texas Sharpshooter style may not be bad data... just misappropriated. They could have value and merit in another debate, but are being misused in this one.
As a continuation of Mike's example: male workplace mortality IS much higher... it just isn't appropriate to use that data to suggest a bias against men at the workplace. Men aren't being shortchanged on safety- they're simply choosing (or being guided towards) far more dangerous jobs, where despite our best efforts, the mortality rate is and always will be higher.
On the other hand, it could be valuable to point this out when it comes to another debate, such as that on the wage gap. Most people would consider that a high-risk job with a (relatively) high mortality rate should probably pay more than a low-risk job- having to face death on a regular basis should pay more than having to deal with stupid people on a regular basis. If such jobs happen to have higher pay, there's no problem... but it creates a wage gap if men are more likely to take such jobs (they're typically seen as more masculine, which simultaneously discourages women from them and encourages men into them... which is definitely bias, but not exactly pro-male bias, unless you consider risking your life for an extra 10% pay 'oppressive' towards those of us who want to live).
If, as Mike suggested, we compare men and women doing the same jobs... the 'mortality gap' nearly vanishes, but so does the wage gap. (Mostly, in both cases... there are, as always, complications.) Bringing up workplace mortality as a partial explanation for the wage-gap is a viable use of that data.
We can fix this gap, but it would involve encouraging women to risk their lives more... or it would require us to underpay those who do risk their lives.
Examination of this tends to show that the wage gap is itself an example of this fallacy- and the data on mortality is one way of showing that.
[It vanishes further if you compare similar education... so much in fact that for the first few years of work for a given graduating class, there is no wage gap... the gap develops over time, as:
Men seem more likely to volunteer for overtime (average work week over 42 hours) where women are more likely to short themselves (average work week under 38 hours).
Women are also more likely to take extended absences, such that if/when they return, they have less experience and fewer raises under their belts than their male cohorts.
Both may well be the result of cultural bias, as women are expected to sacrifice careers for personal or family lives... but by the same token, men are expected and pressured to sacrifice personal and family lives for their careers- the bias in this case cuts both ways, as sacrifice is pretty much always bad. No one should be pressured into making either- if they make one or the other, it should be entirely by choice.]
Confirmation bias is a biggun... it's allllll over the place... and so very very easy to fall into unintentionally. I can't tell you how many times I've seen two opposing sides of a debate BOTH get tripped up by this one. Mike's example is a very good one, but incomplete in that regard.
TL/DR: Anyhow. Data is neutral... it's how it's used that's either fallacious or valid. Keep that in mind.
[How it was gathered can also be a problem, but only in that it restricts the valid uses of the data in some way.]
You know that thing about Mike and straw-Mike. It applies very well to that "pay gap" you and other feminist supporters talk about.
Incidentally, I have never seen the statistics on workplace death used to claim that no one cares about male safety. But I have seen it used as a counter to the claim that women are oppressed. If women _were_ oppressed, they would historically have been stuck in those dangerous jobs. And they were not.
^ Red herring. This video is to show an example of a Texas sharpshooter fallacy, not to argue over the topic of workplace fairness by sex.
ZhangtheGreat
It would only be a red herring if I were trying to claim the sharpshooter fallacy didn't exist and if he hadn't brought up the side topic at all.
You are probably right that he didn't want to argue the particular point. The way he sets up these videos, "real Mike" is supposed to be the unquestioned voice of reason. (When he doesn't agree with either side, he uses straw-Mike and hay-Mike.) I am simply disputing a sub-topic of the main video.
John Undefined I don't think he wants "real Mike" to be "unquestioned," but just more reasonable in his arguments. Really, nothing is "unquestioned."
ZhangtheGreat
Well, in this case, I do not find "real Mike" to be more reasonable, and I gave my reasons why.
John Undefined In this particular video, if we only focus on the topic of the discussion, then that's up for debate. However, if we're only looking at the method used between Mike and Straw-Mike, then the former is still more reasonable because he doesn't put the cart before the horse. That's really the whole point of this video in the first place; whatever your take is on the topic, in terms of method, Mike uses more reason than Straw-Mike.
The amount of people in the comments with high thumbs up that didn't understand what the fallacy straw Mike commits is staggering.
It's like digital vomit. Wow these people just don't get it.
We fully understand the fallacy that he commits, however in the same breath Mike uses a Texas sharpshooter fallacy in proving his point.
Assumption: Women are not allowed to participate in dangerous work
Proof: 95% of the people in the industry are men
Conclusion: Therefore we see more male deaths.
He commits the exact same fallacy that he's explaining.
Stawman
He is asking merely that you consider that evidence, not that it is the sole evidence. He is not making a case, but rather questioning anothers case and presenting another range of facts. You are making this out to be far more simplistic then it is, and trying to paint what he said in an oversimplified light so you can knock over his argument.
Travis Bewley Oh god, you completely missed the entire argument.
louie wallenberg
Sorry for disturbing this thread.
Did you really just block me and delete my comment on the other thread?^^
I just wanted you to explain what your actual problem with feminism is and to give evidence why you think the roman, english, thracian, egyptian, english or norse culture have not been patriarchal. Also I provided you with lists of rulers, that in my opinion support the notion, that they were. Can't you just admit that you were wrong?
Texas Sharpshooter fallacy indeed.
I believe you've just described creationism.
Someone brings up anything regarding feminism in a video and many upvoted comments are more about feminism than the actual subject of the video.
The internet, you have become predictable.
+Firstname Lastname basically the mcintosh fallacy :D
see what i did there
ainz ooal gown Great Tomb of Nazarick wut?
Firstname Lastname wait how did this happened weird apparently instead of posting the comment on its own i accidentally made a reaction
Is there anything illegitimate about hijacking a well-meaning criticism of one’s reasoning such as this excellent video is, in order to discuss a needful topic?-Let’s see you write one about masculism!
This whole series is extremely necessary!
so by that argument the woman make less then men is not because of patriarchy but because the jobs that pay very well (construction, longshoremen, plumber) tend to have men rather that women. thus it's not about equal pay for equal work but women need to be given chances and have the desire to enter these career fields.
pretty much.
Not trying to discredit your argument, but aren't those blue collar working class jobs? Jobs that don't pay well? Or am I mistaken?
Plumber or sewer worker pay relatively well.
Great job!! Please continue making these helpful videos! Hats off, for making this material understandable and fun to learn.
Workplace danger regarding genders is a complicated topic and while the argument that work is more dangerous for men is a bit of an oversimplification, its not a completely invalid point. The most dangerous jobs aren't male dominated because they are exclusionary, but because they typically have a bar of physical ability that most women can't meet. These sorts of jobs are also the ones where poor oversight and regulation are more likely to lead to disastrous safety concerns for the employees. Thus it would make sense to focus more on these jobs when it comes to concerns about workplace safety, and thus, by extension, focus more on men's workplace safety. It is also true that humans generally respond more to the danger of women, and their danger is given greater notice. I think, thus, that its a bit of a mistake to use that example, as your own counterargument also misses the nuances of a complicated subject.
We only have to worry about the dead people and not their gender but because they happen to be of the male sex and feminists ideologue abhors a male victim this suddenly becomes "Complicated". Enough of the sophistry, it's a problem and we should show concern because men are human beings and deserve it just as much as a women.
edtastic I'm a feminist and last time I checked, I love men. Also, last time I checked, I'm for workplace safety in ALL fields equal, or of male or female dominance.
So next time you might wanna think twice about making a blanket statement about all feminists. And also, guess what, PEOPLE LIKE YOU are what breed radical feminism. And sane feminists like me are tired of the fucking bullshit. Get off your high horse and lets fucking work together to fix issues for both men and women!
Bart Bols If you paid any attention to anything that's not anti-feminist propaganda, you'd notice that a lot of people are hesitant to call them self a feminist BECAUSE of "manhating bitches." Myself having been one of those people for a long time. So it seems that these bitches you speak of actually drive people away from the term feminism.
However I can confirm that seeing anti-feminist comments have only caused me to become more and more aware of why feminism is important. People are way too often blinded by radical feminists and assume that's how every feminist is like and that must be what feminism is. But the majority of people you talk to who consider them self a feminist will tell you that to them feminism means "Equality for men and women."
The only time I've ever heard feminism as something to make women above men is when MEN define it.
Its not that women cant meet the bar-albeit most cant without intentional training-but rather its merely because the careers do not appeal to women due to their natural tendencies.
Bart Bols
feminism
ˈfɛmɪnɪz(ə)m
noun:
the advocacy of women's rights on the ground of the equality of the sexes.
Feminism does not "take away from one and give to the other gender to "balance things out"..." that's not how feminism works, what you are describing is some sort of prejudiced sexism and misandry. Feminism striving towards EQUAL rights for men AND women, it just so happens that women tend to be way more oppressed than men at the moment and historically. While yes there are still men's gender issues, and believe it or not there are actually feminist rallies supporting men's rights.
So the new movement you're describing that fights for both sides in feminism. So welcome to being a feminist, it's pretty awesome.
I understand the point you are making, but I think you are making it the wrong way. If the discussion was originally about workplace deaths being in traditionally "masculine" fields, then the counter should have been that we need more safety regulation in those types of workplaces regardless of who is working in them. Making it strictly about gender equality is changing the topic. We can talk about either workplace safety or gender norms. They may impact each other, but they are still separate issues.
Well, instead of teaching bad commenters about Fallacies, you have started a flame war.
Easy to fly off the handle whe you’re high on ‘Tube!
Protect male workers! We need to start a campaign on this.
You could have used the gender wage gap myth as your example, since the claim that women make 77 cents on the dollar compared to men fails to account for occupation, hours worked and other important factors. when you compare men to woman doing the same work, women make about 95 percent of what men do, still a gap, but not the 23 points that even the President has quoted!
Exactly!
I really appreciate your videos on fallacies. Just here to mention that!
WOOO! There back! Like Christmas has come one last time just for me. Thanks Mike.
The arguments for the gender wag gap are key examples of the texas sharp shooter & goal post moving.
1)State a statistic about how much women make, blame the outcome on employer discrimination,whilst leaving out information that discredits it.
2)When met with sound reasons discrediting the wag gap,move the goal post & say that it's about "equality" & even if the gap isn't due to "employer discrimination" but mostly women's choice.Blame that choice on discrimination by warping the defininition making a choice become "discrimination."
If the Texas Sharpshooter is getting shot groupings tight enough to draw bullseyes around them, he may just need to adjust his sights. :P
Concise yet thorough. I like it! I think I'll watch more...
Maybe it would have been a better idea to use a fact or at least something that's commonly agreed on opinion as your example instead of one that is heavily debated for this fallacy it causes unnecessary discussion taking away the point of this video. The Coldplay not being black metal thing in the fallacy fallacy video was a perfect example.
I am so happy that these videos exist!
Straw Mike is an MRA, figures.
thanks for making these, Idea Channel!
"A lot of men are dying because they work in dangerous work."
Solution
"Get more women in there, so that they die and make the statistic more balanced!"
Flawless logic. Instead, maybe you should try to make these dangerous jobs more safe? It's still a worthy point to note that men do these kinds of jobs because they pay more, hence creating the pay gap myth that we see today which this channel will most likely adamantly defend as a real thing.
Instead of saying "Well, it's your fault for alienating women from these work spaces", maybe we should try to work to preserve life, whether it's male or female? Historically, women won't work in dark, wet, tight, uncomfortable places. Like a mine shaft... Or sewer maintenance. Or construction. These jobs are inherently dangerous due to the kind of activity you're doing, and they subsequently, disproportionately effect men because women refuse to enter these kinds of jobs and instead move into child care, nursing and etc. (Basic college major statistics supports this.)
Though I'm all for having a little bit more female deaths, as unnatural deaths have disproportionately effected men throughout the entirety of history. This is a gender issue and trying to paint it as anything else is indeed false. As this can be applied to the pretty much any issue that modern day feminist claim to support.
This guy is a hipster with more than 500k subscribers. Did you expect anything than popular opinion simply being repeated?
How is it a gender issue? Sounds to me it's a safety issue with those particular jobs.
I don't think anyone is arguing that unsafe jobs should remain unsafe, just that if you look at a broad statistic you may not get all of the specific information. There's still an interesting discussion to be had about why some of these unsafe jobs are male-dominated. Status quo? Social convention? Active discrimination? I don't know, and the video didn't go into detail because that wasn't the point Mike was trying to make.
GrimFaceHunter
Wait what? How can be a hipster yet also repeat popular opinion? Hipsters naturally speak against anything popular because they dislike things that are mainstream.
Your statement doesn't make any sense!
E Hernandez It's not about social convention or discrimination, lead the Occams razor.
Women and men have different desires and interests, which leads them into different fields of work.
Not that the patriarchy is somehow making women not enjoy these fields, or somehow actively tries to make them not get into that field.
Mike did indeed revert the issue of men being the majority of work related deaths being men is that "We don't allow women to enter those work spaces" which is not only false but misleading and extremely un-empathetic towards male life.
"War mostly have male deaths because women aren't allowed to fight in wars."
No, because men are FORCED to fight in wars. Trust me, men are not interested in being blown in half by shrapnel, neither are they interested in having an entire mountain falling down on their head while mining.
Interestingly you know about this Fallacy and yet you did it about a month ago quite proudly on twitter. PBS Idea Channel
But I the motto is practice what I preach I suppose.
isnt that like the confusion of cause and effect in twilight of idols by nieztche?
"The error of confusing cause and effect. There is no more insidious error than mistaking the effect for the cause: I call it the real corruption of reason. Yet this error is one of the most unchanging habits of mankind: we even worship it under the name of "religion" or "morality." Every single principle from religion or morality contains it; priests and moral legislators are the originators of this corruption of reason..."
Straw-Mike's face is just precious.
Maybe Mike used a Texas sharpshooter fallacy to disprove a Texas sharpshooter fallacy on purpose, ya know, to see if you can catch it.
one prevalent example of this: because a history of smoking is a requirement for a diagnosis of certain lung diseases such as Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease, (and Asthma in some western countries) then it self fulfills the prediction that smokers are more likely to suffer from these diseases than nonsmokers, because even if a nonsmoker has the same symptoms, they can't get the same diagnosis without a history of smoking.
I don't think I've ever seen an MRA saying that most of the deaths in work places are male. Though since those jobs are so dangerous, perhaps there's some ways would could simply make the workplace safer for all.
He gets the sharpshooter fallacy is wrong. It doesn't apply if you have a prior expectation before examining the data. From wikipedia "Thus, it typically does not apply if one had an ex ante, or prior, expectation of the particular relationship in question before examining the data. For example one might, prior to examining the information, have in mind a specific physical mechanism implying the particular relationship."
Did anyone else notice the "what what in the butt" background music playing near the end there?
But isn't the gender/sex on-job-mortality rate imbalance similar to the gender/sex wage gap, in that it's caused more by peoples choices then societies inherent sexual prejudge against/for one gender/sex?
Trying to be a well rounded and reasonable human being is really hard. Probably worth it, but it still takes a lot of work to be at one's best. I think, I never get by being my personal average but I'm somewhat okay with that as well.
1:20 and that's one of the reasons men are paid more on average.
lol. The gender pay gap is a california soy latte fallacy.
Really good explanation
I've noticed some people are freaking out about the statistic with men dying in the work place, and the "response" of "well if more women worked dangerous jobs, they'd die too".
People, he's just pointing out how illogical the statistic is. He's not actually saying that women should work more dangerous jobs so that not as many men are dying, and I doubt he's making a comment on women's jobs and presence in the workforce. Calm down, and listen to the logic talk. It's just an example
Soooo glad this was made..... Now I have somewhere to send people to get the explanation I always sound dumb trying to explain to people
I work with someone who thinks he can make parking spaces appear with positive thinking. His proof is that he thinks positively and he often finds parking spaces. His further proof is that I complain about sometimes not finding a parking space.
2:13 ancient aliens......lol😂😂😂😂
That Donna Noble Gif though
Was that Robert Duncan McNeill doing the demonstration? 🖖
I agree with Louie. This is a bad example of a Texas Sharpshooter. This is about disproportionate allocation of resources to fit the situation. This has nothing to do with gender equality. Allocate more funds to helping men in the dangerous jobs or collectively women should shift to more dangerous occupations over time. And if so the solution should be allocated based on gender changes over time...
You have yet to address the "Appeal to emotion" fallacy
+Alan Hewlett I can't possibly imagine why...
lol i know right?
They have actually
Watch the Norweigan show Brainwash, it relates heavily to this.
Hey! I actually recognise a record on the boards behind you. Music has the Right to Children. A good album, from a Scottish group, with Canada in the name.
At the end, that was a really good quote. Did he actually just come up with it?
Well, to be fair, you'd have to have a pretty tight shot group for the Texas Sharpshooter Fallacy to work.
It's a purse, not a lunchbox!
So would the scientific method be based around a Sharpshooter Fallacy? Go and collect points of data, attempt to draw a pattern from the collected data to from a hypothesis, then test hypothesis against more data. The first two bits are basically the fallacy in question, we just then test it against more evidence.
I am conforted to know that I'm not the only one who thought his example was disgusting.
Isn't the intro technically an example of the fallacy?
Dealing with the issue of dangers at work, I argue it´s fair to include the strippers and prostitutes. I doubt those jobs are included in the official statistics, but they are probably among the most lethal job there is. Not at least due to the correlation with drug abuse and psychological disease. If we include those kind of works, the death on work ratio between the genders would decrease.
Straw Mike is pure nightmare fuel.
Here's the thing though... if this metaphorical sharpshooter can get a tight enough grouping to look impressive when he paints the target around the holes then how is that different from nailing the target? It would make more sense to suggest that he punched the holes with something manually before painting the target and then saying he used his gun, wouldn't it?
How tight the grouping appears is determined by the size of the retroactively-applied target.
As long as the sharpshooter holds a tight enough group to paint an impressive target upon, I'm usually ok with it.
Not trying to be a dick, Mike did once thank people for pointing out the lego/legos problem. he seems able to accept pointers and thereby learn. In the first few lines it should have been 'utmost', not 'upmost'
Thank you so much for this but I think your more worried about youtoube comments than texts
Huh, I see this in just about every single political meme and discussion on Facebook, as if America's political problems were actually simple enough to solve through a tiny picture with clever use of sarcasm.
Just here to prevent people from getting 1st
You're just as bad
Nope, I'm better. I'd even say I'm the best.
Jesus Christ
He's worse, he failed every time xD
Oberkiller Wrong, I didn't fail this time.
Kaisergun
Whether you were first or not, you still fail, sweety :)
This one could be used as a counter argument for the fine tuning of the universe.
You should look up the difference between precision and accuracy
This was a weird way to remind everybody that men face way more danger in the workplace... and texas sharpshooter fallacy.
So on his argument could he extend that to saying something about Male dominated jobs are more dangerous because some sort of reverse sexism exists that produce fewer work opportunities that are safe for men? That sounds unsubstantiated as I wrote. If I hypothetically found some sort of statistic would that argument be valid?
I thought it referred to Lee Harvey Oswald.
"Le" music defenders, this video is for you.
this is a tricky one.
Is it me or did anyone else zone out on this guy after about 30 seconds? ZZZZZZZZZZ!
I don't think his logic is flawed like many people are complaining.
We can say the same about gender pay gap myth. If someone wants to see whether there is a pay gap they should look at men and women at same skill level doing same job and compare their salaries.
But most women, feminists and politicians are painting the target around average of all men's salaries vs average of all women's salaries, completely ignoring other factors like the industry, skill level, leave etc.
what's the difference between sharpshooting and cherry picking?
Oh, comments, your intellect impresses me.
This statistic about work related deaths being overwhelmingly male (remarkable if not true) is one I've heard a couple of times, but what more general point are we supposed to draw from this.
The more general point is that we don't care about these workplace deaths *because* they're mere males. The implication is that if somehow feminists started becoming loggers en masse and then started dying like flies as a result, society would very quickly move to make that job safer. In fact, that's almost exactly the societal response we see when it comes to homeless people. A minority of homeless people are women, yet where the issue of homelessness is gendered in mainstream narratives (i.e. not MRA forums), it's invariably "Oh will somebody please think of the homeless women?"
While I think saying that you need to put more women on every work station and field of work is ridiculous, because it is essentially saying that you should force a group onto a certain field that they have no interest in (in general), the rest was very well presented.
Thank you, Mike. Please, I urge you, keep making these fallacies videos as neutral and as unbiased as possible, and don't bring politics into entertainment.
Is it an example of Texas Sharpshooter Fallacy? Yes.
Does it accurately and effectively show what is wrong with such an argument? Yes.
Why are you getting so defensive over this again? Looks to me like it was a good example.
8jb65 If you want to equate being glad an "educational" entertainer is staying neutral in his arguments to being defensive, be my guest.
It's just that on the last batch, most of those arguments were derived and utilized in an attempt to go against the whole GamerGate thing (and like many have stated previously, the arguments against the fallacies were utilizing those very same fallacies, for some reason).
I think these videos are good to those that want to get into debates and civil arguments with others (dunno why you'd want to do that over the Internet in public forums, but whatever xD), but if you bring your personal sociopolitical biases/opinions/ideology into the frey, obviously it will not gel with those that do not agree.
Hen LP I don't think he brought his personal opinions into the frey any more than any other comment would. That's what makes it a good example. See, I figured it was defensive on your part only because it literally could have been anything - the topic used as an example is irrelevant because its not like he is saying all people who hold that underlying notion (that men are second class citizens) necessarily make these type of fallacies.
GheyForGames Really? Well maybe you should send him one of his own fallacy videos! I'm not going to get into a substantial argument over a single, relatively short statement made specifically to point out a fallacy in an example used only for that purpose. That would just be pugnacious and, frankly, stupid. Wouldn't you say?
8jb65 There was nothing wrong with the argument in the first place. The video maker is the one using the sharp shooter fallacy not the puppet complaining about workplace deaths. If you didn't see him draw the circle around the target you're probably suffering from that confirmation bias. In fact that may very well have been his intent. There is no dismissing the work place deaths. Men being in dangerous jobs but not getting attention to their safety needs is exactly the point. Derailing it by saying women don't work those jobs is wholly absurd.
Nope I came here for finishing my homework
Well this is awkward now
Hey bro, love the content of your videos. Just one suggestion: moderate the gifs. It's annoying trying to pay attention to your interesting content while all that stream of images is running wild through the screen. I either pay attention to you, or to try to read the memes or laugh at the gifs. The screen feels a bit saturated, plus all the posters on the background. Personally, it's a bit overwhelming. Hope my critique helps, all the best for you and your channel, you have great things to say.
This video left me more confused..
more pls
So.... is this similar to confirmation bias?
I don't understand this Fallacy. It confuses me every time someone tries to explain it. :/
It basically means formulating the issue in a manner tailored to fit your arguments and views.
Kinda like those clickbait titles which are technically not wrong but completely misrepresent their subject.
Most of the comments here I see saying the real mike was being fallacious seem to have not understood what straw mike was saying, and thus didn't seem to understand the argument real mike was making. Straw mike was suggesting that the high male death rate is proof of a focus on female safety over male safety in the work place. The reality however is that the disparity is caused by the most dangerous jobs being primarily done by men. To show that work safety makes work safer for women then men you would have to look at men versus women within the same profession.
One would be inclined to believe this argument all the way till the end. You can not say that facing away from the water would not keep a persons feet dry. I would point you to the argument that reality only exists when one is observing it. One can not explain the definition of a sharp shooter fallacy while at the same time containing a sharp shooter fallacy. This I am afraid is called a paradox and not a sharp shooter fallacy.
Anyone come here from the book
You are not as smart as you think?
Do women even want to work with construction and shipping? No they dont (safe to assume imo) so its not a matter of forcing women into these job sectors... Other commenters are explaining this much better but my point still stands
Why would straw mike use the argument "we are more interested in women's safety than men's safety"? If the point that he is trying to make is that men are oppressed, then why wouldn't he just argue "men are more oppressed because 90% of work place deaths are men" and then the statistic would actually support his claim and he wouldn't be using the sharpshooter fallacy.
100% of religious arguments
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_personal_incredulity
*Tip fedora*
thesumo5 Remember that it works both ways, so it applies to both atheists and theists.
"Merely exaggerating" in this case serves only to marginalize people and shut down arguments, not to encourage rational discussion and mutual respect, which I believe is the spirit of these videos. At the end of the day, my response was apt: it is an "argument" from personal incredulity, not evidence, exaggeration or not, and therefore fallacious. Bigotry is never a valid response.
please make a video of why a fallacy is a fallacy
The type of arguing that drive me away from religion
"In conversational practice, a Texas Sharpshooter ignores information outside of a desired result."
*FeministFrequency intensifies*
A much better example of the Texas sharpshooter fallacy would be the myth of the gender pay gap, since it fits your definition far better, and is a much more widely held misconception. But I'm forgetting that the premise of your video is really just a flimsy pretext to white knight the naked empress known as Feminism.
Oh! A baby boomer.
& they didn't mention evolution once!
We should still ask why the more dangerous jobs are male dominated.
As a side question if Women are rare in STEM fields and manual labor what do most women do with thiere lives?
Artsy_Judoka Kids?
Artsy_Judoka Business?
Because the brain works this way we have brainstorming sessions where something like, "Okay, what are we missing guys?" comes up several times.
I admit to using this fallacy way too much but I confess ignorance. I just can't know all the factors. Nobody does. What we should be looking for are blatant or extreme usage of this fallacy.
In the example given, Straw Mike seemed to be sincere, but was working with incomplete data. I don't fault him and believe he would accept Mike's revision.
So, this fallacy is more about ignorance than falsification.
After reading the comments, and after long believing I was just an average Joe with average intelligence, I am now beginning to believe I am of superior intelligence, if not a genius.
when people watch a video about fallacies, but then in the comments they make fallacies mostly about feminism.
Confirmation Bias: cause of roughly 90% of human stupidity.
Could you apply this fallacy to the argument, that women don't go into these jobs today because they find them demeaning? if that's the case then fatalities at work are due to the lack of women in the jobs that are "beneath them".
Is yours