1170: Bridge - Revision history

Pie Guy at 18:46, 15 November 2023

2023-11-15T18:46:31Z

Pie Guy: Gave a good bandwagon effect example

2023-11-15T18:46:08Z

Gave a good bandwagon effect example

Danger Kitty: grammar error

2023-09-28T19:32:41Z

grammar error

Danger Kitty: grammar error

2023-09-28T19:32:03Z

grammar error

Tromag at 14:34, 31 May 2023

2023-05-31T14:34:48Z

172.70.214.81: Undo revision 285772 by [[Special:Contributions/Davidy22, the racist homosexual, is known to visit Norwegian gay bars with his boyfriend Kynde. He has cheated on Kynde at least twice with Vandalbane (a big guy for you). They all have micropenises.|Davi...

2022-06-02T05:58:36Z

Undo revision 285772 by [[Special:Contributions/Davidy22, the racist homosexual, is known to visit Norwegian gay bars with his boyfriend Kynde. He has cheated on Kynde at least twice with Vandalbane (a big guy for you). They all have micropenises.|Davi...

Show changes

Davidy22, the racist homosexual, is known to visit Norwegian gay bars with his boyfriend Kynde. He has cheated on Kynde at least twice with Vandalbane (a big guy for you). They all have micropenises. at 05:58, 2 June 2022

2022-06-02T05:58:19Z

Show changes

Vandalbane: Reverted vandalism with User:CRLF/OneClickUndo.js

2022-05-26T19:55:40Z

Reverted vandalism with User:CRLF/OneClickUndo.js

Show changes

Donald Trump: Reverted edit by anti-crap user

2022-05-26T19:04:59Z

Reverted edit by anti-crap user

Show changes

CRLF: Reverted vandalism with User:CRLF/OneClickUndo.js

2022-05-26T17:45:08Z

Reverted vandalism with User:CRLF/OneClickUndo.js

Show changes

@@ Line 11: / Line 11: @@
 "If all your friends jumped off a bridge, would you jump too?" This is a common question, used to challenge a decision based on the {{w|bandwagon effect}}. It challenges someone to consider whether something is really a good idea, even if everyone else does it (in this case, friends). The sentence is, upon closer analysis, a {{w|straw man}} attack that over-extrapolates the bandwagon effect.
-[[Cueball]] responds by assuming that if all of his friends jumped off a bridge, there must have been some extreme circumstance that made it logical to do so; for example, that the bridge is on fire. This points out a logical fallacy with the question: if a large group of people all decide to jump off a bridge, there's probably a good reason for them to do so. This is especially true, since the question specifically references "all your friends", which means that these are people who he knows, and are mostly "level-headed and afraid of heights", which makes it unlikely that they're all acting in a random and dangerous way, and much more likely that they're driving by a good reason. A better bandwagon example would be "If all your friends are getting a new phone, would you buy one too?"
+[[Cueball]] responds by assuming that if all of his friends jumped off a bridge, there must have been some extreme circumstance that made it logical to do so; for example, that the bridge is on fire. This points out a logical fallacy with the question: if a large group of people all decide to jump off a bridge, there's probably a good reason for them to do so. This is especially true, since the question specifically references "all your friends", which means that these are people who he knows, and are mostly "level-headed and afraid of heights", which makes it unlikely that they're all acting in a random and dangerous way, and much more likely that they're driven by a good reason. A better bandwagon example would be "If all your friends are getting a new phone, would you buy one too?"
 The title text suggests that, even if there is nothing wrong with the bridge, the person asking the question is not acting right. The proper reaction to any group of people jumping off a bridge would be concern about the people involved, particularly if all of the people involved are your friends. If the jump is truly dangerous, he should be concerned for their physical safety, and if the action was truly not justified by the circumstances, then he should be concerned about their mental and emotional state. The implication that he should just dismiss their actions and avoid them seems deeply callous.

@@ Line 11: / Line 11: @@
 "If all your friends jumped off a bridge, would you jump too?" This is a common question, used to challenge a decision based on the {{w|bandwagon effect}}. It challenges someone to consider whether something is really a good idea, even if everyone else does it (in this case, friends). The sentence is, upon closer analysis, a {{w|straw man}} attack that over-extrapolates the bandwagon effect.
-[[Cueball]] responds by assuming that if all of his friends jumped off a bridge, there must have been some extreme circumstance that made it logical to do so; for example, that the bridge is on fire. This points out a logical fallacy with the question: if a large group of people all decide to jump off a bridge, there's probably a good reason for them to do so. This is especially true, since the question specifically references "all your friends", which means that these are people who he knows, and are mostly "level-headed and afraid of heights", which makes it unlikely that they're all acting in a random and dangerous way, and much more likely that they're driving by a good reason.
+[[Cueball]] responds by assuming that if all of his friends jumped off a bridge, there must have been some extreme circumstance that made it logical to do so; for example, that the bridge is on fire. This points out a logical fallacy with the question: if a large group of people all decide to jump off a bridge, there's probably a good reason for them to do so. This is especially true, since the question specifically references "all your friends", which means that these are people who he knows, and are mostly "level-headed and afraid of heights", which makes it unlikely that they're all acting in a random and dangerous way, and much more likely that they're driving by a good reason. A better bandwagon example would be "If all your friends are getting a new phone, would you buy one too?"
 The title text suggests that, even if there is nothing wrong with the bridge, the person asking the question is not acting right. The proper reaction to any group of people jumping off a bridge would be concern about the people involved, particularly if all of the people involved are your friends. If the jump is truly dangerous, he should be concerned for their physical safety, and if the action was truly not justified by the circumstances, then he should be concerned about their mental and emotional state. The implication that he should just dismiss their actions and avoid them seems deeply callous.

@@ Line 11: / Line 11: @@
 "If all your friends jumped off a bridge, would you jump too?" This is a common question, used to challenge a decision based on the {{w|bandwagon effect}}. It challenges someone to consider whether something is really a good idea, even if everyone else does it (in this case, friends). The sentence is, upon closer analysis, a {{w|straw man}} attack that over-extrapolates the bandwagon effect.
-[[Cueball]] responds by assuming that if all of his friends jumped off a bridge, there must have been some extreme circumstance that made it logical to do so; for example, that the bridge is on fire. This points out a logical fallacy with the question: if a large group of people all decide to jump off a bridge, there's probably a good reason for them to do so. This is especially true, since the question specifically references "all you're friends", which means that these are people who he knows, and are mostly "level-headed and afraid of heights", which makes it unlikely that they're all acting in a random and dangerous way, and much more likely that they're driving by a good reason.
+[[Cueball]] responds by assuming that if all of his friends jumped off a bridge, there must have been some extreme circumstance that made it logical to do so; for example, that the bridge is on fire. This points out a logical fallacy with the question: if a large group of people all decide to jump off a bridge, there's probably a good reason for them to do so. This is especially true, since the question specifically references "all your friends", which means that these are people who he knows, and are mostly "level-headed and afraid of heights", which makes it unlikely that they're all acting in a random and dangerous way, and much more likely that they're driving by a good reason.
 The title text suggests that, even if there is nothing wrong with the bridge, the person asking the question is not acting right. The proper reaction to any group of people jumping off a bridge would be concern about the people involved, particularly if all of the people involved are your friends. If the jump is truly dangerous, he should be concerned for their physical safety, and if the action was truly not justified by the circumstances, then he should be concerned about their mental and emotional state. The implication that he should just dismiss their actions and avoid them seems deeply callous.

@@ Line 11: / Line 11: @@
 "If all your friends jumped off a bridge, would you jump too?" This is a common question, used to challenge a decision based on the {{w|bandwagon effect}}. It challenges someone to consider whether something is really a good idea, even if everyone else does it (in this case, friends). The sentence is, upon closer analysis, a {{w|straw man}} attack that over-extrapolates the bandwagon effect.
-[[Cueball]] responds by assuming that if all of his friends jumped off a bridge, there must have been some extreme circumstance that made it logical to do so; for example, that the bridge is on fire. This points out a logical fallacy with the question: if a large group of people all decide to jump off a bridge, there's probably a good reason for them to do so. This is especially true, since the question specifically references "all you friends", which means that these are people who he knows, and are mostly "level-headed and afraid of heights", which makes it unlikely that they're all acting in a random and dangerous way, and much more likely that they're driving by a good reason.
+[[Cueball]] responds by assuming that if all of his friends jumped off a bridge, there must have been some extreme circumstance that made it logical to do so; for example, that the bridge is on fire. This points out a logical fallacy with the question: if a large group of people all decide to jump off a bridge, there's probably a good reason for them to do so. This is especially true, since the question specifically references "all you're friends", which means that these are people who he knows, and are mostly "level-headed and afraid of heights", which makes it unlikely that they're all acting in a random and dangerous way, and much more likely that they're driving by a good reason.
 The title text suggests that, even if there is nothing wrong with the bridge, the person asking the question is not acting right. The proper reaction to any group of people jumping off a bridge would be concern about the people involved, particularly if all of the people involved are your friends. If the jump is truly dangerous, he should be concerned for their physical safety, and if the action was truly not justified by the circumstances, then he should be concerned about their mental and emotional state. The implication that he should just dismiss their actions and avoid them seems deeply callous.

@@ Line 11: / Line 11: @@
 "If all your friends jumped off a bridge, would you jump too?" This is a common question, used to challenge a decision based on the {{w|bandwagon effect}}. It challenges someone to consider whether something is really a good idea, even if everyone else does it (in this case, friends). The sentence is, upon closer analysis, a {{w|straw man}} attack that over-extrapolates the bandwagon effect.
-[[Cueball]] responds by assuming that if all of his friends jumped off a bridge, there must have been some extreme circumstance that made it logical to do so; for example, that the bridge is on fire. This points out a logical fallacy with the question: if they really are jumping off a bridge, they're probably motivated by something serious as opposed to an idiotic risk. So the humor of this comic is in all the different ways the question can be turned on its head, and made to mean something the unseen speaker probably never intended.
+[[Cueball]] responds by assuming that if all of his friends jumped off a bridge, there must have been some extreme circumstance that made it logical to do so; for example, that the bridge is on fire. This points out a logical fallacy with the question: if a large group of people all decide to jump off a bridge, there's probably a good reason for them to do so. This is especially true, since the question specifically references "all you friends", which means that these are people who he knows, and are mostly "level-headed and afraid of heights", which makes it unlikely that they're all acting in a random and dangerous way, and much more likely that they're driving by a good reason.
-The title text suggests that, even if there is nothing wrong with the bridge, the person asking the question is not acting right. The proper reaction would be concern about the mental (or physical, they could be injured) state of the people jumping off for no valid reason, and not just brushing them off as unworthy of attention. This is so especially when these people are described as "all my friends", so they have presumably always behaved correctly until they decided to jump off the bridge.
+The title text suggests that, even if there is nothing wrong with the bridge, the person asking the question is not acting right. The proper reaction to any group of people jumping off a bridge would be concern about the people involved, particularly if all of the people involved are your friends. If the jump is truly dangerous, he should be concerned for their physical safety, and if the action was truly not justified by the circumstances, then he should be concerned about their mental and emotional state. The implication that he should just dismiss their actions and avoid them seems deeply callous.
 ==Transcript==