Nuclear Launch Detected... =o - Page 42

On December 11 2008 08:26 rei wrote:
One argument i see people making here is:

if continue with invasion of japan, then it will cause more lives (than nuking japan) based on statistical evidences of World War II provided by the experts.
Therefor, Nuking Japan is morally permissible, base on the # of lives saved.

This argument is a fallacy.
First fallacy committed here is "Appeal to Authority"
http://changingminds.org/disciplines/argument/fallacies/appeal_authority.htm
In this case, the evidence are not clear, I have yet see anyone provide any statistical evidence to support the number of live saved by nuuking Japan. All we have here is Appealing to the Authorities.

second fallacy committed here is "False Dilemma"
http://changingminds.org/disciplines/argument/fallacies/false_dilemma.htm
In this argument there are only 2 choices, nuke or invade, where not invading japan is not consider an option.

Third fallacy commited here is "False Cause"
http://changingminds.org/disciplines/argument/fallacies/false_cause.htm
This argument is constructed as such that, A causes B
A = reduce death count
B= nuking Japan
A causes B then becomes reduction of death count cause nuking of Japan
This casual relationship between A and B never existed to begin with, because A is not a fact, A is merely an educated guess.


There you have it, never make the argument to justify the lives it saved by nuking Japan, Because that argument is full of Fallacies.

On December 11 2008 15:21 rei wrote:

Here is my argument:

premises:
1) your argument makes the decision on whether to nuke japan or not by the amount of lives it saves( Less death = better)
2) your argument contains two options to choose from which both cause deaths(nuke, or invade).
3) a seize fire peace treaty aims to stop the war which leads to no death.
4) base on the method of decision(choose the least life lost), the 3rd option is the best choice.
5) the choice made was "nuking of japan"
6) Hypocrisy is the act of preaching a certain belief, religion or way of life, but not, in fact, holding these same virtues oneself.

Conclusion: Your argument says that the decision is made base on the number of lives it saved, but nuking japan was not justified by the number of lives it saved because of premise #4.
By preaching the belief of making the decision base on least death caused, but in fact(nuked japan) not making the decision base on least death caused is Hypocrisy. (Supported by premise #1, #2, #5 and #6)