Educational Postcard: Types of Faulty Logic errors: False Cause by Ken Whytock Via Flickr: The background image for this comes from a modified photo of a picture in a magazine.
seen from United Kingdom
seen from United States
seen from United Kingdom
seen from Hong Kong SAR China

seen from Sweden

seen from Poland
seen from United States

seen from Finland
seen from Brazil

seen from TĂźrkiye
seen from United Kingdom

seen from United Kingdom
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from China
seen from United Kingdom
seen from Spain
seen from Maldives

seen from Czechia
Educational Postcard: Types of Faulty Logic errors: False Cause by Ken Whytock Via Flickr: The background image for this comes from a modified photo of a picture in a magazine.

Anya is live and ready to show you everything. Watch her strip, dance, and perform exclusive shows just for you. Interact in real-time and make your fantasies come true.
Free to watch ⢠No registration required ⢠HD streaming
So, I happened earlier to be looking at the summary for a course type thing on analyzing arguments.
And, I didnât super look into it, but from what I saw it seemed to have, like, stuff on argument structure and logical fallacies and that kind of thing. Which I think is about what I would expect from something like it.
Argument dynamics are a thing I kind of think about a lot at least on a background level, because tumblr and stuff. Which makes me wonder - are there courses and materials like this that talk about the other kinds of stuff I tend to notice, that I think I donât usually see mentioned places?
(Some examples, not in an organized fashion because I donât have them that way:
A big one is like, what people are bringing to the argument that they donât actually say in the argument. (Or, on the other end, what people are likely to read from it, that isnât said in it.)
One major example is âwhat people mean when they say word Xâ.
Another one is connections-to-other-things, often by affiliation. So, I could say something using the jargon of a particular group and by this be communicating my association with that group (and some amount of their angles/viewpoints/approaches/other opinions.) Or, someone could read me saying something commonly associated with some other opinions on a different topic, and think I likely share that opinion. (And I could know about this and be communicating accordingly).
Another is earlier foundations of the âwhyâsâ of things someone might be saying, or conversely the fact that they havenât given thought to them. (Like âthis person subscribes to divine command theoryâ and such).
Another big one is personal stuff - âif thing X is done, this would be bad for meâ, or âpeople who want thing X done have been really horrible to someone I care aboutâ, etc.
Another one relevant to connection/affiliation is things like âpeople who say thing X are disliked, I am afraid of that happening to meâ. etc.
(And I think when I do see the concept of âthings brought to the argument but not said in itâ brought up, itâs usually just âwell thatâs not goodâ, which I think is missing a lot of things. Like, a lot of this is too much information if you start trying to stick it in explicitly, or we donât have good communication technology for actually doing so, or thatâs too much for people to do. Some of it you kind of canât stick in explicitly by definition. Which can still have negative effects etc (and totally does), but itâs considerably more complicated than âtell people not to do itâ.)
)
I understand that Lionel Jefferies manipulated, murdered, and kept a bunch of people trapped in his basement to do experiments on them.
However his brother locked him up in a mental hospital where the doctors kept him chained up to a wall and never let him get up to move, eat, or use the bathroom.
So, I think his actions towards Madison were pretty justifiable.
Lessons from an enlightened weed Labels like âbutterflyâ or âmothâ make some people confused. Flowers and weeds arenât so conflicted. Conflict means youâre thinking too hard. Sway in the breeze your own way (just like everything else) and eventually, an end will present itself to all things and it will be a blessed relief.
This is an over simplification
We breathe plant farts

Anya is live and ready to show you everything. Watch her strip, dance, and perform exclusive shows just for you. Interact in real-time and make your fantasies come true.
Free to watch ⢠No registration required ⢠HD streaming
âSGAâ is compulsory homosexuality.
Edit: Okay, this post was ill-considered. I had a point, but it gets lost easily in the snarky one-liner and the inflammatory language. I was never trying to argue that âcompulsory heterosexualityâ is actually a thing; Iâm starting to realize that one-liners donât work for me.
Emotions, in my experience, aren't covered by single words. I don't believe in "sadness", "joy", or "regret". Maybe the best proof that the language is patriarchal is that it oversimplifies feelings. I'd like to have at my disposal complicated hybrid emotions, Germanic train-car constructions like, say, "the happiness that attends disaster." Or: "the disappointment of sleeping with ones fantasy." I'd like to show you how "intimations of mortality brought on by aging family members" connects with "the hatred of mirrors that begins in middle age." I'd like to have a word for "the sadness inspired by failing restaurants " as well as for "the excitement of getting a room with a minibar." I've never had the right words to describe my life, and now that I've entered my story, i need them more than ever.
Jeffrey Eugenides
I want to work in a museum when I graduate inshallah and I can already imagine what Somali people including my family are gonna say âshe works in a shop that has pictures and statues that you canât even buyâ