This shows a fallacy of distraction because it says proven to REDUCE fine lines and wrinkles which is a false conclusion. You can reduce the APPEARANCE of fine lines and wrinkles temporarily/daily if you continue using the product, but you cannot turn back the damage that has already been done. (I learned this from a teacher in the esthetician program I interpreted for)
A false analogy explanation should include a comparison between two things: What is held to be analogous to what; what dissimilarity causes the analogy to fail.
Distraction, too, is interesting. But what distracts the reader from what?
A false analogy explanation should include a comparison between two things: What is held to be analogous to what; what dissimilarity causes the analogy to fail.
Distraction, too, is interesting. But what distracts the reader from what?
Wow! j is on fire! came outta nowhere and just posting away on all the blogs! :) You stumped me. I don't think I even understand the distraction fallacy now. What do you observe from this ad?
Yeah, really, who the hell's J, they're not even on my list. Maybe a random person who's scanning blogs and saw we needed help!! :) J, you seem to know what you're talking about...bring it!
Fallacies of Deduction: "Wash Away 10 Years." This is not logical. Cleaning cloth can't wash away 10 years, no matter the memory, skin, or brains tissues, whatsoever related to human bodies.
Microdermabrasion washes or wipes away the top layer of skin (or more if applied with more pressure). The written claim is that this disk will "wash away 10 years." The implied meaning is that using the disk will wipe away enough layers of skin to take the wrinkles out - hence, making you look 10 years younger due to lack of wrinkles. Disk + skin wiped away = 10 years less in age. This is a deductive fallacy because simply looking younger does not make one younger. This is also a fallacy based on appeal to envy. As peopel age their body changes. One of the biggest signs of aging is wrinkles (and hair loss for men) - the ad is also implying that by using this product you can dial back time allowing you to compete or fit in with the young, wrinkle free crowd.
9 comments:
This shows a fallacy of distraction because it says proven to REDUCE fine lines and wrinkles which is a false conclusion. You can reduce the APPEARANCE of fine lines and wrinkles temporarily/daily if you continue using the product, but you cannot turn back the damage that has already been done. (I learned this from a teacher in the esthetician program I interpreted for)
This is a false analogy - to date nothing can reverse time. This ad claims to "wash away 10 years."
A false analogy explanation should include a comparison between two things: What is held to be analogous to what; what dissimilarity causes the analogy to fail.
Distraction, too, is interesting. But what distracts the reader from what?
A false analogy explanation should include a comparison between two things: What is held to be analogous to what; what dissimilarity causes the analogy to fail.
Distraction, too, is interesting. But what distracts the reader from what?
Wow! j is on fire! came outta nowhere and just posting away on all the blogs! :) You stumped me. I don't think I even understand the distraction fallacy now. What do you observe from this ad?
Yeah, really, who the hell's J, they're not even on my list. Maybe a random person who's scanning blogs and saw we needed help!! :)
J, you seem to know what you're talking about...bring it!
You're now The Mystery Blogger.
Fallacies of Deduction: "Wash Away 10 Years." This is not logical. Cleaning cloth can't wash away 10 years, no matter the memory, skin, or brains tissues, whatsoever related to human bodies.
Pardon, all: J's an alter ego. I didn't mean to be mysterious; I just had forgotten I was still logged on after updating another blog.
Ever onward, H@pP!Ly! If it's a deductive fallacy, it should have premises and a conclusion, something like this:
A is true and B is true, so C must be true.
Something in that statement would be mismanaged.
Microdermabrasion washes or wipes away the top layer of skin (or more if applied with more pressure). The written claim is that this disk will "wash away 10 years." The implied meaning is that using the disk will wipe away enough layers of skin to take the wrinkles out - hence, making you look 10 years younger due to lack of wrinkles. Disk + skin wiped away = 10 years less in age. This is a deductive fallacy because simply looking younger does not make one younger. This is also a fallacy based on appeal to envy. As peopel age their body changes. One of the biggest signs of aging is wrinkles (and hair loss for men) - the ad is also implying that by using this product you can dial back time allowing you to compete or fit in with the young, wrinkle free crowd.
Post a Comment