Talk:Argumentum ad baculum

From Iron Chariots Wiki
(Difference between revisions)
Jump to: navigation, search
m
 
(3 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown)
Line 7: Line 7:
 
--[[User:Kazim|Kazim]] 06:56, 19 July 2006 (MST)
 
--[[User:Kazim|Kazim]] 06:56, 19 July 2006 (MST)
  
I'd prefer to have the main article under the Latin name and the common English name redirect to that argument. While these generally have only one Latin name, they may have several English names (or a different name in French or Spanish...and we may someday have folks willing to offer translations of the site).
+
: I'd prefer to have the main article under the Latin name and the common English name redirect to that argument. While these generally have only one Latin name, they may have several English names (or a different name in French or Spanish...and we may someday have folks willing to offer translations of the site).
  
Argumentum ad baculum, for example could be "argument from force" or, more literally, "argument from the stick". I've found both of these (and others) around the net. As most of sites which discuss fallacies opt for the traditional Latin...I'd say we should too. [[User:Sans Deity|Sans Deity]] 07:42, 19 July 2006 (MST)
+
: Argumentum ad baculum, for example could be "argument from force" or, more literally, "argument from the stick". I've found both of these (and others) around the net. As most of sites which discuss fallacies opt for the traditional Latin...I'd say we should too. [[User:Sans Deity|Sans Deity]] 07:42, 19 July 2006 (MST)
 +
 
 +
 
 +
: I have a fondness for the Latin names, if only because they sound fancy, and are the official names for these fallacies. I think the Latin names tend to be more fixed, while English names have lots of variations.
 +
: It looks as though redirect pages can be put in categories, so both "argumentum ad baculum" and "argument from force" can appear in the category list. However, the search utility doesn't find them.
 +
: Another possibility, though this seems like a hack, would be to have "Argument from force" be a separate page containing "<nowiki>{{:Argumentum ad baculum}}</nowiki>"
 +
: Perhaps the best compromise is to have the main page be the Latin name; list all of the non-Latin synonyms on the page (this is a good idea in any case); and make redirect pages for all of the synonyms.
 +
: --[[User:Arensb|Arensb]] 07:48, 19 July 2006 (MST)
 +
 
 +
:: Okay, Latin is fine then.  I don't think we should list both versions in the index because that would be needlessly cluttered.
 +
::--[[User:Kazim|Kazim]] 08:11, 19 July 2006 (MST)
 +
 
 +
==It's not a fallacy==
 +
Provided that the original premise of the argument is correct, it is a sound and compelling argument. i.e if you do indeed go to hell if you don't believe in him, it is a good reason to believe in God. Not that it in any way supports the original premise.

Latest revision as of 09:08, 15 September 2008

Here's a question. If a fallacy has both a common English name and a Latin name, then in which language do we want the articles to be titled? I think an official decision needs to be made very soon, as many more Latin names will come up.

If English, then "Argumentum ad baculum" should be a #REDIRECT to "Argument from force," which would contain the main article.

My main argument for keeping it in English would be that it will be easier to find the correct name on the fallacy category index. Obviously some arguments, such as "post hoc ergo propter hoc", will be better known in Latin.

--Kazim 06:56, 19 July 2006 (MST)

I'd prefer to have the main article under the Latin name and the common English name redirect to that argument. While these generally have only one Latin name, they may have several English names (or a different name in French or Spanish...and we may someday have folks willing to offer translations of the site).
Argumentum ad baculum, for example could be "argument from force" or, more literally, "argument from the stick". I've found both of these (and others) around the net. As most of sites which discuss fallacies opt for the traditional Latin...I'd say we should too. Sans Deity 07:42, 19 July 2006 (MST)


I have a fondness for the Latin names, if only because they sound fancy, and are the official names for these fallacies. I think the Latin names tend to be more fixed, while English names have lots of variations.
It looks as though redirect pages can be put in categories, so both "argumentum ad baculum" and "argument from force" can appear in the category list. However, the search utility doesn't find them.
Another possibility, though this seems like a hack, would be to have "Argument from force" be a separate page containing "{{:Argumentum ad baculum}}"
Perhaps the best compromise is to have the main page be the Latin name; list all of the non-Latin synonyms on the page (this is a good idea in any case); and make redirect pages for all of the synonyms.
--Arensb 07:48, 19 July 2006 (MST)
Okay, Latin is fine then. I don't think we should list both versions in the index because that would be needlessly cluttered.
--Kazim 08:11, 19 July 2006 (MST)

It's not a fallacy

Provided that the original premise of the argument is correct, it is a sound and compelling argument. i.e if you do indeed go to hell if you don't believe in him, it is a good reason to believe in God. Not that it in any way supports the original premise.

Personal tools
Namespaces
Variants
Actions
wiki navigation
IronChariots.Org
Toolbox