Fighting dirty

So, a while ago, while reading a particular philosopher, I came across a list of his that supposedly tells a person how to win an argument. I don't know if it is just me, but I think that this list isn't a list that helps someone win an argument through logic and reasoning, but through less honorable methods. Many of these arguments commit the informal fallacies that we discussed in the pamphlet, and these ways to win will make it so that you do not win by virtue of the argument, but through subtlety, deceit, and psychological warfare.

Unfortunately, I think that many people who engage in arguments and debates have the capacity to distinguish the difference between these two different kinds of victories. One is fulfilling and purposeful, the other, shallow and meaningless. When one is focused solely on winning, and not on exchanging knowledge and beliefs, the argument will become faulty.

Reasoning

Those who invalidate reason ought seriously to consider whether they argue against reason with or without reason; If with reason, then they establish the principle that they are laboring to dethrone: but if the argue without reason (Which, in order to be consistent they must do), they are out of reach of rational conviction, nor do they deserve a rational argument.
-Ethan Allen
     This quote I found in Carl Sagan's The Demon Haunted World, which concerns the state of science in modern day society. In the book, he explains how science and scientific thought is being attacked by pseudoscience, new age metaphysics, and culture. In all, this book is his defense of scientific thinking and rational thought. The quote stood out to me especially because I am in a logic and critical reasoning course.
     It really is impossible for somebody to argue against reasoning and logic because in order to do that and convince other people, they must use what they are arguing against. And in that reasoning, there is the paradox which really shows to me the importance of this concept called reason.
P1-One cannot argue against reason with reason without undermining their own argument
P2- One cannot argue against reason without reason because one could not argue it rationally.
C-One cannot argue against reason successfully.

Why Howdy

So, for those of you who do not know, this is my blog for my Intro to Logic philosophy class. Here, I will be talking about all sorts of logical things (hopefully).
For those of you who don't know me, my name is Griffin, and I am a sophomore philosophy/psych major. So in other words, I am pretty good at critical thinking, deep insights into human nature, and BS. I love reading and writing (Fantasy and nonfiction mainly), and hope to have at least one actual novel published before I die.
So, starting this week I will be blogging, so look forward to my next post!