quote:Originally posted by PurpleHaze:quote:Originally posted by WEc:
The difference is whether the statement A, itself, is relevant to the field of Y. Of course, in the absence of this relevance, this fallacy is immediate (i.e., drink Pepsi cause Michael Jackson endorses it) but even in the event that A is relevant to Y, this is still a fallacy (The chief economist at the Bank of ABC said that interest rates will fall and so therefore interest rates will fall!)
Then it would also hold that it would be a fallacy when WEc says, "Pork and veal are not red meats." If I'm going to look to an authority in the classification of meat, it ain't going to be either WEc or the OED!!
This, is perhaps one of your more commendable posts as opposed to the frat boy behavior you sometimes exhibit.
FWIW, siding with the USDA interpretation of red meat is almost akin to answering the doctor's questionnaire truthfully. I am known to be a victim of irrational rationalizations.