this post was submitted on 14 Nov 2024
565 points (99.0% liked)

News

23367 readers
3100 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Ice cream brand Ben & Jerry’s said in a lawsuit filed Wednesday that parent company Unilever has silenced its attempts to express support for Palestinian refugees, and threatened to dismantle its board and sue its members over the issue.

The lawsuit is the latest sign of the long-simmering tensions between Ben & Jerry’s and consumer products maker Unilever. A rift erupted between the two in 2021 after Ben & Jerry’s said it would stop selling its products in the Israeli-occupied West Bank because it was inconsistent with its values, a move that led some to divest Unilever shares.

The ice cream maker then sued Unilever for selling its business in Israel to its licensee there, which allowed marketing in the West Bank and Israel to continue. That lawsuit was settled in 2022.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Let's go back a few steps in the thread. The response was simply "Reducto ad absurdum" as if that explained it right there. Except, that's not itself a fallacy. It might be used in a fallacious way, but simply stating "Reducto ad absurdum" does not point out any fallacy what so ever.

And that's my whole point. People use the term in a muddy way that takes away from a tool.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

So that's where you want the goal posts now?

I specifically agreed that reducto ad absurdum isn't inherently a fallacy in the first sentence of my first reply to you.

And that's my whole point

It is now that your original point that "there's no such thing as a reducto ad absurdum fallacy" has been shot to pieces 🙄

People use the term in a muddy way that takes away from a tool.

That's the case with almost every tool of every kind that people have access to.

Especially in the case of language, people are constantly using it wrong, and while I genuinely applaud your intention of projecting a useful tool from being dulled by misuse, the battle is an uphill one to begin with.

Don't make it even worse by misstating your position and then defending that mistake like it's the Korean border.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I said early on:

There might be some other logical fallacy at play. Slippery slope is a common one in cases where people cite reducto ad absurdum. But why not cite the actual fallacy rather than the one that isn’t a fallacy at all?

Yes, you can use reducto ad absurdum arguments in a fallacious way. That's true of literally any kind of argument, so it's pointless to say that. Point out the actual fallacy or don't.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Reducto ad absurdum fallacy = reducto ad absurdum used fallaciously. That's all.

I can explain it for you, but I can't understand it for you.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

But why call that out at all? Why not call out an actual fallacy built inside a reducto ad absurdum argument (assuming there is one)? The poster way up the stack did not clarify at all. They posted "reducto ad absurdum" as if that was the end of it.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 week ago

The poster way up the stack did not clarify at all. They posted "reducto ad absurdum" as if that was the end of it.

Perhaps they were using that as a shorthand for "reducto ad absurdum fallacy" and, not unreasonably, expecting that people would infer ad much from context.

Either way, we have discussed this to death and you're still beating the horse, if you will forgive the purposefully mixed metaphor.

Even if you won't, it's too late now, so we all must find a way to cope. Have a good day.