Generalizing Arguments

Discussion in 'Marijuana Legalization' started by dokc, Jan 16, 2015.

  1. Making generalized statements in regards to anything makes you the fool.
     
     
    I see this in activism and counter activism for cannabis.
     
    An argument is a series of statements typically used to persuade someone of something or to present reasons for accepting a conclusion.
     
    Because I really feel that these statements harm progress. I will make hideous generalized statements and a fool of myself in an attempt to fight fire with fire. In hopes to persuade you from arriving at very generalized conclusions in the future. 
     
    ---
     
    http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/breaking/ct-mother-attempted-murder-children-met-20150115-story.html
     
    Apple juice has the potential to be kill and harm. Make apples illegal.
     
    ---
     
    http://www.foodallergy.org/allergens/peanut-allergy
     
    Peanuts have the potential to kill and harm. Make peanuts illegal.
     
    ---
     
    The potential for these food items to kill and harm has objectively been proven. This is the core of my argument. The fact that I can prove the potential for these food items to be dangerous exsists. Therefore; my grade school mentality says this potential to kill needs to be generalized even further and remove the entirety of that specific food item and make it illegal.
     
    The generalization can be further paralleled. These two food items have the potential to kill and harm. Make all food illegal.
     
    In my argument I have presented objective reason for you to arrive at an conclusion all your own. However, I have failed in presenting a fair and broad argument. Which I will allow you folks to point out if you so desire. 
     
    My belief of the harm caused from these statements is propagated not by the generalization, but rather by the fallacy and inconsistency this way of thinking arrives at.
     
    If we allow these arguments to go unchecked and unbalanced we will arrive at a pungent and prejudice conclusion.
     
    TLDR, Hand cause crime. Cut off everyone's hands. No crime. 
     

     
  2. I always look at it like this-without any prejudices while out and about if you were to walk up on a cannabis plant in the woods would you see it as a harmful plant to be avoided because it causes a health risk? for example- most people have issue with poison ivy so yes, be careful with that plant but cannabis??  common sense these days while needing no explanation but the very act of doing something with absolute results to come to a conclusion.  if the conclusion is forward of the doing what is the purpose in doing anything
     

Share This Page