I am far too lazy. And, if you actually cared, you'd be able to google it to confirm it or not. You're just trying to strawman. It's cute. Like a panda.

 

I see a lot of this 'strawman' and 'logical fallacy' stuff on the tipit forums. I've never really seen it much on other forums and never heard anyone say it in real life, in any debate. Why do people use this on here? It seems quite childish.

I am far too lazy. And, if you actually cared, you'd be able to google it to confirm it or not. You're just trying to strawman. It's cute. Like a panda.

 

I see a lot of this 'strawman' and 'logical fallacy' stuff on the tipit forums. I've never really seen it much on other forums and never heard anyone say it in real life, in any debate. Why do people use this on here? It seems quite childish.

 

Simple. It's easier to call someone out on one of those than to refute their point. The rest of the debate/post is then disregarded in favor of attacking this supposed error in logic, which is, ironically, exactly what a strawman argument consists of.

Not to mention that Einstein probably never said that.

 

He did, in fact, say that. OP is, unfortunately, misinterpreting the quote in order to fill his wanted definition.

 

In Runescape, you don't do the same thing over and over expecting a different outcome each time. You do it as a process to achieve something, such as a level, a drop, etc. Aka a shitty job.

Show me the specific text in which Einstein stated it.

 

I am far too lazy. And, if you actually cared, you'd be able to google it to confirm it or not. You're just trying to strawman. It's cute. Like a panda.

It's not strawman at all. I just don't want you to falsely attribute quotes.

 

By the way, I did research it for a while before I even posted. You are 200% wrong about Einstein saying that. It is written in exactly zero of his works, while showing up in several others. It also looks like the original source is from a Chinese proverb, but that's up for debate.

Asking you for a source of your quote is totally legit, and it is on you to provide the source. You don't get to pawn off that work to the person asking for legitimate proof.

Why you guys are getting so worked up about a very poor definition of insanity is the real question, I think.

Why you guys are getting so worked up about a very poor definition of insanity is the real question, I think.

It's general discussion. This sort of thing is the norm. :razz:

Right, I'll just go back to OT and wait for someone to say something.

I am far too lazy. And, if you actually cared, you'd be able to google it to confirm it or not. You're just trying to strawman. It's cute. Like a panda.

 

I see a lot of this 'strawman' and 'logical fallacy' stuff on the tipit forums. I've never really seen it much on other forums and never heard anyone say it in real life, in any debate. Why do people use this on here? It seems quite childish.

 

Simple. It's easier to call someone out on one of those than to refute their point. The rest of the debate/post is then disregarded in favor of attacking this supposed error in logic, which is, ironically, exactly what a strawman argument consists of.

 

This post is an example of the "Fallacy Fallacy" Fallacy. This fallacy occurs when a person commits a logical fallacy in their argument, is called out on it by the other person who then disregards the original argument as a result of the fallacy, and then the original person fallaciously argues that it's fallacious to call his original fallacious argument fallacious and fallaciously dismiss it on the grounds of it being fallacious.

 

It's important to note, however, that I am not necessarily attacking your post or dismissing your argument; because if I did, I would be succumbing to the "Fallacy Fallacy Fallacy" Fallacy.

 

I am far too lazy. And, if you actually cared, you'd be able to google it to confirm it or not. You're just trying to strawman. It's cute. Like a panda.

 

I see a lot of this 'strawman' and 'logical fallacy' stuff on the tipit forums. I've never really seen it much on other forums and never heard anyone say it in real life, in any debate. Why do people use this on here? It seems quite childish.

 

Simple. It's easier to call someone out on one of those than to refute their point. The rest of the debate/post is then disregarded in favor of attacking this supposed error in logic, which is, ironically, exactly what a strawman argument consists of.

 

This post is an example of the "Fallacy Fallacy" Fallacy. This fallacy occurs when a person commits a logical fallacy in their argument, is called out on it by the other person who then disregards the original argument as a result of the fallacy, and then the original person fallaciously argues that it's fallacious to call his original fallacious argument fallacious and fallaciously dismiss it on the grounds of it being fallacious.

 

It's important to note, however, that I am not necessarily attacking your post or dismissing your argument; because if I did, I would be succumbing to the "Fallacy Fallacy Fallacy" Fallacy.

 

 

The original poster hasn't responded at all.

The original poster hasn't responded at all.

 

The asylum might have bad wifi.

 

Why you guys are getting so worked up about a very poor definition of insanity is the real question, I think.

 

 

 

As someone who finds value in accuracy, I find common misquotes rather obnoxious. It's like how "Elementary, my dear Watson" or "beam me up, Scotty" are some of the most recognizable quotes from their respective properties, although they never appear in those works. The Albert Einstein misquote is essentially for one ignorant person to say to other ignorant people so they'll respond "well it doesn't make any sense to me but Albert Einstein said it so it must be intelligent" without putting any critical thought into it.

 

To put it into perspective, imagine if you spent all of your life writing a book series only to have the most popular quote be something you hadn't written.

Makes sense.

Good Luck Man.

 

Work on the self confidence.

It's me I said it and everybody keeps on using it without my permission and it's really ticking me off so please stop it.

According to the magic of the internet the earliest known occurrence of the "definition of insanity" quote is from a novel known as Sudden Death, by Rita Mae Brown.

 

Seeing as Einstein died in 1955, it probably didn't come from him.

Besides, doing the same thing repeatedly expecting different results is a part of the scientific method. It's how you tell if a hypothesis is faulty or not.

If the same thing happens repeatedly, the hypothesis works out. If it doesn't, the hypothesis doesn't work out.

Beyond that, if you constantly play tennis, you expect different results from the next match in comparison to the last one. As you have more experience than you did previously.

 

This definition of "insanity" at best works out in some very limited contexts, at worst it doesn't work out at all.