sender

wholemeal

source

Unspecified

share

view

TreeList

There should be inbuilt definitions for logical fallacies in arguman

Raindrops

however
1 supporter.
Rather than having to hunt for a fallacy by name, let the user directly type keywords that describe the error in logic; and let Arguman list fallacies that match that description. It is far easier to select a fallacy from the short list. (This is how Bugzilla finds potential duplicate bugs)
Raindrops

because
2 supporter.
Many users are not familiar with the formal names of fallacies; especially in Latin form. They need a description that explains what the name means.
Cogni

because
1 however
4 supporter.
The linked wikipedia page does not describe most of the fallacies used here... if any
rkyeun

however
2 because
4 supporter.
Mouseover text should describe the fallacies, and there should be far more options to choose from.
ReligionIsDumb

because
and but's for but's should be counted as because's on the frontage of arguman
2 fallacy reported.
Irrelevant Conclusion
wholemeal

because
18 supporter.
the names of logical fallacies are not descriptive enough
NTPfun

but
1 but
The developers are too lazy to do so.
sources:

Just kidding! :P

2 fallacy reported.
Wrong Direction
Pruwbb

because
1 because
The wikipedia page is darn bland, lacks example, and lacks fallacies.
sources:

Expirience

1 fallacy reported.
Fallacy Of Is To Ought
Login or register to add a premise for this argument.