Quote:
Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague
That was not a straw man. It's a reductio ad absurdum, if anything. You have now failed philosophy 101.
|
It's a straw man (fallacious reductios are a subset of the straw man fallacy).
Your reductio is fallacious because it is question begging - you assume that somehow a museum extolling Hitler's virtues would be legal - which is almost assuredly untrue. You then use this inappropriate assumption as the reductio's cudgel.
You basically laundered your fallacious reasoning.
I don't think you failed Phil 101, but you definitely aced sophistry 101.