Scholar is a horribly designed job and shows zero thought goes into healer design

[Katish]

The fallacy some people is indeed part of that fallacy... the fallacy is your still appealing to popularity, the bandwagon fallacy. It doesn't even necessarily mean the populace believes you but rather you make it seem so. Appeal in this case means to say something about a subject matter by giving it to an amount of people, usually of a larger group but it doesn't have to be the majority. Basically, it renders that you the person believe that your argument cannot stand on its lonesome so you attempt to gardner people of like mind and add in a populace that holds that idea or you just do it to make what you say more viewed as a fact even if it isn't, in the end it's to make what you say more believable even if that populace doesn't exist, or if it does exist, ignoring who makes up that populace.

Do note: An appeal does not equate to the truth. And, it does not neccessarily equate to what the populace believes.

My conclusion:
You use those terms to appeal and gardner public opinions. Which takes away from the relevant evidence that is true. Which is fine sometimes but I see it too often than naught, which could allow me to draw the conclusion that you might not actually believe in what you say. Hence, why I said to refrain from said usage to make a more believable statement. Since this is just general information:
https://fallacyinlogic.com/bandwagon-fallacy/
I recommend scrolling the examples.

[Renathras]

...

Good god, there was no attempt to be "legalistic pedant".

I think (because suggesting anyone else does is apparently a bandwagon fallacy now) that the healers DO provide a satisfactory answer IN THEIR OWN CONTEXT.

However, that was not the discussion. The discussion was how White Mages are in other Final Fantasy games. You can't enter a discussion in progress and insist it must be about the topic in the way you want it to be - to commandeer an in progress discussion. You can add a point or your desired direction to the discussion, you can't force everyone else to bend to it and insist they're being <insert insult> if they don't.

I didn't address that because that wasn't the discussion we were having.

As for Yuna, specifically, that ALSO isn't "weagawistic pedaticiswm". The argument was presented that Yuna was a White Mage with the SPECIFIC claim that the lore and game SAID SO directly with no interpretation needed. I was literally countering an argument someone above presented. You can't attack someone as "legalistic pedantic" for them following a conversation. Maybe you should try following the conversation instead of insulting people who are?

Moreover, you speak of exceptions that prove the point, when Yuna is LITERALLY the exception that proves the point. <_<

And if you think I'm coming on too strong in this reply - note that we were having a conversation just fine and you decided to launch into an insult fest. Mayhap don't do so.

You know SCH is a horrible job when Yuna outshines it.

Heh.

That actually did make me chuckle. SCH Demi-Bahamut when?

The fallacy some people is indeed part of that fallacy... the fallacy is your still appealing to popularity, the bandwagon fallacy.

No, it's me making a statement of fact - that I am not the only person who believes or feels a certain way. That's it. It's the difference between me saying "I believe the Earth is round" (which implies no one else does) or "Some people believe the Earth is round" (which is a statement of fact). There's no appeal to a group. It's only saying that "more than one person" feels or thinks a thing. That's literally it. The bandwagon fallacy version would be "Because so many people believe the Earth is round, you should too/you'd be a fool not to/etc". Which isn't at all the construction I was using. (Note here that we're using the Earth being round as a fact, but if you think personally it's flat, feel free to substitute flat there, the end result is the same either way - I wasn't using bandwagon fallacies.)

It is not, in fact, part of the bandwagon fallacy, since there's no appeal to that group as being correct or one you should join. See:

"The bandwagon fallacy, also known as the appeal to the masses or appeal to common belief fallacy, is the logical fallacy of claiming that something is true because everyone believes it. ... In other words, there’s nothing inherently illogical about claiming that something is popular, positive, or effective because it’s enjoyed by many. The fallacy lies in the claim that because something is popular, it must be effective, true, or otherwise positive. ... Essentially, the bandwagon fallacy makes listeners and readers question any opposition they have to the position being discussed." ( https://www.grammarly.com/blog/bandwagon-fallacy/ Emphasis/bolding from source)

From your own link: "Bandwagon fallacy is a logical fallacy that is based on the assumption that something must be true or good if it’s in accordance with the opinions of many others."

Note that I never stated "Because some people like it... therefore ...it must be true [or] you must agree". This means it was NOT, in fact, a bandwagon fallacy. Note that I have neither stated something must be true or good BECAUSE "many people" agree with it. In fact, I'm generally in the minority here and arguing for the minority, not the majority, which is the EXACT OPPOSITE of a bandwagon fallacy.

Moreover, the first time you chastised me for this when when I said "Some people absolutely love (SCH's kit being clunky/fighting itself)", which would be me supporting Osmond's position, not arguing against it.

Additionally, the SECOND time you did so was in the same post you were using it as a red herring to avoid admitting the answer to the topic at the time: That you had no proof to support your claim Yuna was explicitly referred to as a White Mage in FFX's lore after you made the absolute and explicit claim that she was so. In other words, one might think you were trying to evade admitting you were wrong using accusation/attack as a smokescreen.

As my use of the terms is always factual - a greater than 1 person group of people hold a position - not as arguing that they must be correct or right or that you must join them; it's not a bandwagon fallacy.

Moreover, considering how many people here DO use the appeal to majority/bandwagon fallacy who you AREN'T correcting, I feel it necessary to point out your critique of its use may not be in good faith.

Again, I'm not sure which specific case you're referring to, but the use of the term I made prior to you starting to attack me over it was "Some people absolutely love that..." and "Again, some people love that...many people do not.", which are statements of fact, not an intent to lead to a conclusion. I wasn't even arguing FOR A CHANGE, I was merely arguing that the other poster might be mistaken over why many people prefer SGE over SCH.

It was not an admission of an argument not standing, it was not an attempt to argue for a course of action, and it was not an attempt to persuade anything in lieu of argument made. Indeed, I made the argument for the WHY right there.

.

Your conclusion is wrong. Not least of which because I EXPLICITLY avoid appeals to majority. It's why I try REALLY hard (and I think I've succeed here in all the cases I've used such language) to never say most or all people believe a thing, nor to use the number that believe as a conclusive impulse for any overall action other than "because some people like X/don't like Y, that is a reason to do X/not do Y, or at least not do so universally", which is a reasonable argument to make when dealing with groups of heterogeneous people. The only time I ever use language like that is if we have definite statistics for it. For example, in the General forum thread on Ty's Healer survey, there were combinations of the groups that would constitute a majority, and we were discussing the results of a survey, so what the majority feels is relevant there (as is what the minority feels, of course). In those cases, we're talking in terms of numerical percentages.

Because I EXPLICITLY avoid using language or argument as your conclusion suggests, not only is your conclusion wrong, it's the exact opposite of the truth. And, again, I'll note you've not once called out anyone else using similar language - though for the benefit of the doubt, it is possible it's because you're new or just haven't seen it, I would have to see what other threads you're posting in to conclude that or not.

I would suggest in the future, you have more care with your conclusions, and also, that you don't use accusation of fallacy to evade admission of being wrong about things.

If you like, I could even point you to examples of you using similar appeals/language in your own posts so you could recant the use of the bandwagon fallacy..?

[Katish]

I will admit when I am wrong, and I will admit my conclusion might be wrong hence why I didn't use definitive language, but it's just what I think given how you phrase things. Being wrong is human nature and for you to assume this as a deflection is in of itself wrong, I was helping you make a more believable statement as I've read through the forum and you seem to post in this way more often than naught. I have not called out anyone
else for it that uses said language cause in said usage it is not a pattern and is usually subconscious. Or the premise defines the means and leads to a conclusion. This is not an attac on you just the phrasing, it's just stating I've noticed fallacy. When I said I didn't have evidence on lore right away that does not equate to a red herring, a red herring is when you give illogical information to stir away from the subject matter (unless you mean me calling out fallacy is a red herring, I assure you it's not giving this isn't the only subject I'm commenting on you from and this is a forum so chaos is more often prevelant than not). And as the lore portion, I could very well be wrong but it was a case of me misrembering as mentioned I remembered it was subtly brought up. But regardless, she has white mage skills which is synergized with other class skills which was my initial argument..

I respect you for giving your honest thoughts and you're welcome to point out my own fallacies should they exist.

And saying I believe the earth is round isn't a fallacy because it's not what the people believe but the evidence that supports that the earth is round. A fact must be true, and a sound argument must have all true premises. I also meant could and not would on my previous comment it's hard to type on my phone so it's hard to recheck this stuff. Lel

Edit: realized I used definitive language without meaning to be definitive.

[Renathras]

I have not called out anyone else for it that uses said language cause in said usage it is not a pattern and is usually subconscious.

Can you actually substantiate this claim? Either that other people here using it are NOT engaging in a pattern (even though they clearly are) and ARE only using it subconsciously?

Additionally, can you substantiate that mine is NOT subconscious?
Can you substantiate that my use IS part of a pattern?

And note what a bandwagon fallacy is and is not - as I noted, my use is not a bandwagon fallacy, and thus you aren't noticing a fallacy as I'm not using it.

As to the red herring, I meant instead of saying "Fair, I have no proof that Yuna is referred to explicitly as a White Mage. I withdraw the claim.", you used the attack in lieu of making that statement, instead replacing it with a nebulous statement amounting to "Well, I THINK it was said, though I can't prove it or think of where or when in the game it was used specifically so that you might be able to validate the claim independently". And as noted, you weren't calling out a fallacy, as I wasn't using the bandwagon fallacy.

As to "I remembered it was subtly brought up"; your claim was not that it was subtle. "in lore she is addressed as a WHITE MAGE no assumptions needed", the "no assumptions needed" would mean it is explicit, not subtle. If it was subtle, then some assumptions MIGHT be needed.

And I didn't say the Earth being round was the fact. I said that people believe it is a fact. In the specific case of Jobs and what people like and dislike about them - since this is a game and not (probably) immutable laws of physics, they are subject to change (or not) based on preference of people. Meaning people believing or not believing a thing is pertinent to such discussions, as would be anything where one takes a vote (in effect, we can vote with our wallets, so again relevant). Noting that some people voted for John Kerry in 2004 isn't suggesting anything other than a fact. Noting that the minority party tends to get at least 47% of the vote in a given national election in the US and so the majority party shouldn't run roughshod over the minority's wishes either is also a statement of fact (the first part) that is pertinent to the outcome or what the result should be (the second part).

Stating that some people like SCH being complex and some people do not is a statement of fact. There are, in fact, some people that do like it and some people that do not like it.

.

That all said;

Yes, Humans make mistakes, and I'm not one to hammer people over the head with them like a cudgel if they're honest mistakes and people aren't doubling down on them or the like.

I also agree she has White Mage as a sub-job, in the same sense a FFTactics White Mage can have Summoner as a subjob; but neither is a case of what a White Mage as a stand alone Job/class is.