Cracked article on logical fallacies

[AMT]

http://www.cracked.com/article_19468_5- ... think.html

Pretty interesting article. It's pretty long so I won't post it in its entirety as I'm on my phone but good to see, especially number 2. I've noticed when people bring up weight gain/weight loss on threads here people seem to ascribe to this.

[evilsoup]

Fairly interesting article (well, it would be if I hadn't read about all those on other sites), but none of those are logical fallacies.

[takemeout_totheblack]

D13
Are you being sarcastic/ironic? Legit question, not looking for an argument here, I just can't tell with you sometimes.

[Simon_Jester]

Fairly interesting article (well, it would be if I hadn't read about all those on other sites), but none of those are logical fallacies.

They're what you might call... meta-logic. They're not a specific error in a syllogism that's easy to nail down the way something like "P implies Q, not P, therefore not Q" would be. But they're still mental errors we make all the time that impair our thinking just as much as the more explicit and obvious ones do.

The fundamental attribution error may not be a logical fallacy. But I bet trying to avoid making it will improve your ability to think clearly and accurately more than worrying about the formally defined "fallacies" in some college philosophy textbook.

[ThomasP]

They're cognitive biases.