kcdodd wrote:P1: Murderers must eat food.
P2: Murderers are evil.
C: Food is the root of evil.
I looked it up, it's called affirming the consequent, a propositional fallacy.
In the absence of other factors.
The Twinkie Defense comes to mind - where food consumption was an indicator of depression, which caused the murders.
So:
P1: Progressivism is the root of many ideas that were used by Fascists.
P2: Fascism is evil
C: Progressivism allows one to indulge in evil and sadism. Progressives are evil.
Actually, progressives seem to be destructive bastards who just want an excuse to smash the system because they believe something better (with them at the top of the food chain, naturally) will magically appear.
And I don't have much problem with them believing that, until they get the keys to the car. At which point there's no limit to the damage they can cause.
No matter how they beg and whine and promise - don't let them have the keys!
When opinion and reality conflict - guess which one is going to win in the long run.
Then the premise would be: If you eat too much, then you are a murderer. Not: If you're a murderer, then you must eat. It is the mistaken assumption that if-then statements are inherently reversible. Even assuming that it is true that: If you are a fascist, then you are a progressive. (which requires that every fascist also be a progressive) It still does not follow that: If you are a progressive then you are a fascist. (which requires that every progressive also be a fascist)
The premise must be re-written in the second form for the argument to even be valid. But, you still have a burden to show the premise is true. You replaced the question of whether progressives are evil by nature with the question of whether progressives are fascists by nature. That is begging the question now (also a fallacy) because that is just as controversial as the conclusion, and so you have a closure problem.
Keep at it though. I would like to see a valid formal argument for either how progressives are fascists, or evil (whichever).
Oh, I'll grant you that they MEAN well - sometimes.
And their intentions are good... usually. When they aren't looking to punish others for perceived sins.
But there is that old saying about what the road to Hell is paved with. And with the 'progressives' in charge for the last few years, it would seem that saying's got a bit of validity to it.
When opinion and reality conflict - guess which one is going to win in the long run.
