Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I didn't say they were being dishonest, I said it feels dishonest. The phrase “it feels” is not carte blanche to say what you want. I could say, “Someone reading this post might think that you’re an axe murderer.” Certainly not me, I don’t think you’re an axe murderer. But someone reading this post might think so. What this does is introduce a new topic of conversation—that topic is you , and whether you’re an axe…
This form of rhetoric for criticism is silly, though. For one, you are giving no charity to the side of my conversation. For two, you have to take it to the absurd caricature of claiming that others think someone is an axe murderer to try and make your point. Literally a type of rhetorical fallacy. I flat out feel it is dishonest, in the vein that it is cherry picked data to further support a point that they agree wi…
No, actually quite the opposite: Reductio ad absurdum is a form of logical proof, not a fallacy.