Flawed logic and the eRepublikan

Day 2,401, 11:03 • Published in United Kingdom USA • by MaryamQ

eRepublik articles, and the offsite fora and IRC channels, are full of endless arguments and counter-arguments, attacks and counter-attacks, claims and counter-claims. It can be really hard to sort out what is true and what is not, especially if you are new to a country or to the game. This guide is intended to help you evaluate the arguments for yourself and make your own decisions about what is right and wrong. With that in mind, I present you a number of logical fallacies you may run across and examples of each.


Ad hominem attacks

Player A: I saw some nice strawberries at the market. They were a lovely red color. [Provides screenshot]

Player B: You’re ugly and you’re mama dresses you funny.

Player B is attacking Player A without really offering a valid argument against what Player A said.

What Player B might have sai😛 Yes, some of those are very red, but not all. I see some on the edges of the shot that are still quite green.



Straw man fallacy

Player A: I’ve noticed that some grocery store clerks wear green shirts.

Player B: That’s a lie. There are 3 clerks at my grocery who are wearing blue shirts.

Player A never claimed that ALL grocery store clerks wear green shirts. Pretending that he did does not disprove his statement.

Hasty generalization

Player C: I just met two players in Brussels who are 2 meters tall. Belgians are very tall people!

This is too small a sample to generalize to the whole population. Besides, whether Player C knows it or not, one of these two players is really Dutch.

Begging the question

Player 😨 As far as I can tell, the sun moves around the earth. It moves from one side of the sky to the other, wherever I may be. Therefore, I am the center of the universe.

Player D’s entire argument is based on a false assumption, leading him to a false conclusion.



Post hoc/false cause

Player E: I crossed the street this morning, and when I returned, there was a large check in my mailbox. I’m going to start crossing the street every day so I will never have to work again.

Just because one event precedes another, that does not mean the first event causes the second.

False dichotomy

Player F: Are you blonde or brunette?

Maybe you are redheaded, gray, or bald. Maybe you are brunette one day and blonde the next. Life tends to offer a spectrum of choices, not just either/or.

Ad ignorantum

Player G: The Invisible Pink Unicorn will trample you under her hooves.

Player H: That is ridiculous. I can’t see any IPU. She doesn’t exist.

Both of these players are arguing from ignorance. You can’t prove either side of this question, although you may feel you have reason to believe one way or the other. The best you can do here is agree to disagree and move on to something else.

Burden of proof reversal

Player J: I’m the best-looking player in this chat room.

Player K: How do you know that?

Player J: I just believe it. Prove me wrong.

There are a lot of people making a lot of claims out there. It’s up to them to prove their claims. Otherwise, there is no burden on others to believe what they say.

Non sequitur

Player L: All women are human. King Woldy is human; therefore, King Woldy is a woman.

Unless I am mistaken, King Woldy is not a woman. If you are reading this, there is a good chance you are not a woman, either. Just because all women are human, it does not follow that all humans are women.



Bandwagon fallacy

Player M: We did a man on the street poll in eUK, and 95% agree that all chickens are headless.

Just because a lot of people believe something, that doesn’t make it so.



ePolitics can be very confusing. Remember that you don’t have to accept what anyone tells you at face value. Look for the evidence, evaluate the arguments, and think for yourself. And above all, look out for the IPU chasing the headless chickens!