Quote:
Originally Posted by G1911
Sure. If we want to say it with an added committee clause, "Munson shouldn't be in the HOF because the voters overwhelmingly rejected him AND the Vets committee has not put him in," we are still supposing that what HAS happened and what SHOULD happen are the same thing. Everyone who is in the HOF should be and everyone not in should not be.
|
Not my argument or the end logic of it, I don't think, I am only arguing the lack of support is a factor when one makes an assessment, perhaps when as here the support is so lacking at both the writer and committee level it might even create a presumption, but obviously not the sole determinant. You seem to view it as entirely irrelevant and I would disagree. It seems related to your expansive, and I would argue incorrect, application of the "appeal to authority" logical flaw.
__________________
My avatar is a sketch by my son who is an art school graduate. Some of his sketches and paintings are at
https://www.jamesspaethartwork.com/
He is available to do custom drawings in graphite, charcoal and other media. He also sells some of his works as note cards/greeting cards on Etsy under JamesSpaethArt.