"But with dogs, we do have “bad dog.” Bad dog exists. “Bad dog! Bad dog! Stole a biscuit, bad dog!” The dog is saying, “Who are you to judge me? You human beings who’ve had genocide, war against people of different creeds, colors, religions, and I stole a biscuit?! Is that a crime? People of the world!”
“Well, if you put it that way, I think you’ve got a point. Have another biscuit, sorry.”
Eddie Izzard, Glorious
But what the dog is doing is it is generalising. That is a beginner’s logical fallacy. It is suggesting that just because somebody else in a group that it perceives you to be in did something unjust, you carry responsibility for that injustice as well. Which does not hold. It is like blaming a German for the Holocaust. So the dog’s argument is cunning, but inherently flawed.
But what the dog is doing is it is generalising. That is a beginner’s logical fallacy. It is suggesting that just because somebody else in a group that it perceives you to be in did something unjust, you carry responsibility for that injustice as well. Which does not hold. It is like blaming a German for the Holocaust. So the dog’s argument is cunning, but inherently flawed.
"But with dogs, we do have “bad dog.” Bad dog exists. “Bad dog! Bad dog! Stole a biscuit, bad dog!” The dog is saying, “Who are you to judge me? You human beings who’ve had genocide, war against people of different creeds, colors, religions, and I stole a biscuit?! Is that a crime? People of the world!” “Well, if you put it that way, I think you’ve got a point. Have another biscuit, sorry.” Eddie Izzard, Glorious
exactly!
But what the dog is doing is it is generalising. That is a beginner’s logical fallacy. It is suggesting that just because somebody else in a group that it perceives you to be in did something unjust, you carry responsibility for that injustice as well. Which does not hold. It is like blaming a German for the Holocaust. So the dog’s argument is cunning, but inherently flawed.
But what the dog is doing is it is generalising. That is a beginner’s logical fallacy. It is suggesting that just because somebody else in a group that it perceives you to be in did something unjust, you carry responsibility for that injustice as well. Which does not hold. It is like blaming a German for the Holocaust. So the dog’s argument is cunning, but inherently flawed.