Originally Posted by leakyfaucet
You're right. It's not. But the conclusion you reached based on the comparison is an example of this fallacy
. Please do not ask me to explain this to you.
I'm not trying to get around your point, I'm simply exposing that your argument is invalid. You are the one trying to divert attention away from the fact that your entire argument is based on a fallacy.
What conclusion have I reached falls under that fallacy, and why? It's nice that declare "fallacy!", but your means of interpreting the fallacy itself is your problem. You're attaching it to a situation where it doesn't apply. The fact that piracy can be
stealing does not fall under said fallacy. That argument is not invalid.
Saying Piracy is not
stealing is too simplistic. That implies under no circumstances can one commit piracy and not be stealing. There
is the fault in logic.
I'll try to explain it to you through example. Take the expression "killing is not murder". That statement implies, under no circumstances, can one kill and be committing murder. Killing can be
murder, in the same fashion piracy can be
theft (stealing). Understand now? Where is your fallacy in that?Edited by Choggs396 - 6/13/08 at 10:44pm