Quote:
Originally Posted by Larry Heinberg
"Since X group are disproportionately responsible for Y, one MUST assume that a person of X group is likely to commit Y".
|
That isn't an argument in the format of an argument
Rewritten:
Since group X is disproportionately responsible for event Y it is more likely that a member of group X will commit event Y than group Z (Whites in this case).
That is logical you buffoon (Albeit it's a statistical argument but I wont muddle your feeble brain with such concepts) . If the premise is true then the statement is valid and true. If it's not true then the statement is merely valid but there is not a single condition under which it becomes invalid.
All conclusions made from this are from reason, not logic and there is no statistical invalidity here even though you'd like to believe there is, but belief isn't enough, not even close.
Quote:
|
That's what I replied to. It is not valid. There are many examples which demonstrate its invalidity.
|
And I bet you cannot find not a single way to do it.
Quote:
|
And I posted that link because of your comment about a "valid" conclusion. Obviously you were going with a different usage, since validity of arguments is not a quality of conclusions. I don't "need" wikipedia - as if that would be relevant anyway. Stop being a wanker.
|
No I wasn't you just don't have any understanding of validity and the sooner you admit this the less I will have to keep humiliating you.