No Lion Remains in Israel: another one bites the dust

[_Fence Sitter]

I really like how Stak put it recently in another thread, stating in just three words what I've formerly taken whole sentences or even paragraphs to get out: fallacy of misattribution. The experiences they've had are real experiences, but A) they aren't what people think they are, and B) don't mean what people think they mean, and C) don't come from the source people claim they do.

Seth can you link this thread?

[_wenglund]

If an apologist is supposedly entirely discredited because a couple of his arguments have become outdated over the years, and are no longer correct, does the same standard apply to critics?

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[_stemelbow]

I really REALLY hate to disappoint anyone here, but these kinds of thoughts have been circulating in my mind for far longer than you all realize. As I said I had already read Guns, Germs and Steel long before I showed my ugly mug around here. Indeed, I think I read it within a year that it came out. I'm not as ill-informed as my posts tend to indicate, nor am I as un-read as my grammar makes me out to be. There's been nothing new to me in this thread aside from the whole idea that there are remnants of horses among the hun afterall (mostly because I didn't think much about it all). Indeed, i recall reading the apologetic that horse remains aren't detected among the Hun even though at some point the horse was so highly used among their kingdom.

I've alluded to the no horse remains among the Hun myself a time or two without thinking too heavily on the matter, but wondering if perhaps we simply can't figure out as much as we'd like about ancient people's, civilizations and their relation to animals. I don't know if you all need to get excited that I'm somehow where you were a few years ago on your life's paths. Indeed, i don't see it. I guess anything could happen, but I still don't see it.

[_stemelbow]

If an apologist is supposedly entirely discredited because a couple of his arguments have become outdated over the years, and are no longer correct, does the same standard apply to critics?

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

I don't think anyone has suggested an apologist is entirely discredited by making this mistake. Or am I mistaken?

[_Sethbag]

I really like how Stak put it recently in another thread, stating in just three words what I've formerly taken whole sentences or even paragraphs to get out: fallacy of misattribution. The experiences they've had are real experiences, but A) they aren't what people think they are, and B) don't mean what people think they mean, and C) don't come from the source people claim they do.

Seth can you link this thread?

Oops, I mistakenly said Stak when it was in fact Tarski who wrote the sentence, and I didn't get it right as far as the three words. There's my problematic memory for you!

The thread is right here, and what most impressed me was Tarski's distillation of the problem was this sentence right here:

The spirit is a mainly garden variety neurochemical phenomenon together with a learned error of attribution.

I apologize for my mistaken reference here. I was very impressed with Tarski's simple one liner, and I guess in my mind I was mulling it over and reformulating it in terms of misattribution, and as soon as I thought of this as a fallacy, my mind immediately turned to Stak, because he's the one usually talking about fallacies lately. The mind plays tricks on one. Thanks for asking me for the link, and forcing me to resolve this and correct what I said earlier!

[_Kishkumen]

If an apologist is supposedly entirely discredited because a couple of his arguments have become outdated over the years, and are no longer correct, does the same standard apply to critics?

Who said Mike Ash was entirely discredited?

Stop the histrionics, wade. If anyone is close to being dismissed out of hand, it is you.

[_Kishkumen]

I don't think anyone has suggested an apologist is entirely discredited by making this mistake. Or am I mistaken?

You aren't mistaken stem. Welcome to the wild, wacky world of wade.

[_Fence Sitter]

Who said Mike Ash was entirely discredited?

Stop the histrionics, wade. If anyone is close to being dismissed out of hand, it is you.

Wade is an apologist? I thought he was a reflectionist.

[_Spurven Ten Sing]

I thought he was a locksmith!

[_Kishkumen]

Wade is an apologist? I thought he was a reflectionist.

Oops! I stand corrected. Wade is a reflectionist.