with a twisted interpretation added, which illustrates the logical fallacy.
For instance, quoting a person saying "I don't like women" and claiming this is proof of misogyny would be a lie if the quote was parsed from "I don't like women who are dishonest".
It would be a logical fallacy to quote the whole thing and then claim that since the speaker did not simply state that he doesn't like 'people' who are dishonest, it proves he is a misogynist.
To call it a fallacy is to dignify it as some kind of attempt to make a rational argument which is later discovered to have a flaw. Trying to identify fallacies is really only useful if someone is playing by the rules. Jones simply doesn't care about things like that; he's got an audience to entertain by shoveling BS so fast that Stakhanov himself would whistle in admiration.
To support his theory on the elite trying to murder the general populace and replace them with robots and a "technocrat, scientific dictatorship", Jones cites this essay by Bill Joy.
I looked through the article and I couldn't find any mention of a deliberate attempt by an elite to kill people and replace them with machine. It seems Joy is just warning that with new technologies comes new dangers and robots with AI could replace humans.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.