Originally Posted by Piobaire
Well, that's a snappy retort after being handed your ass.
Dude. you are an idiot.
To recap. You state (roughly) that "we know more than we don't know" about disease.
I point out that is a statement that would be near impossible to quantify.
Problem number one. You don't understand what "quantify" means. If A is what we do know about disease, and B is what we don't know, we can't measure B without more information that we don't have (since we don't know what we don't know). Therefore a claim that A is greater than B is nonsense in this example.You're just throwing out an opinion. Maybe you're right, maybe not, but we have no way of knowing because we can't quantity A and B in a meaningful way.
Maybe in a theoretical future when we have a near total understanding of disease and a rock solid methodology to quantify knowledge we will be able to point to this moment and determine that your opinion is correct, but we are nowhere near that now.
Problem number two. After misunderstanding what "quantify" means you attempt to address the quantification issue by an appeal to your authority saying basically "oh, I'm in a medical field so I'm in a position to know what we do and don't know."
Never mind that does not in anyway address the issue of of quantification that I initially brought up, it is another logical fallacy.
Problem number three. You think that the appeal to authority fallacy is a problem only if you are, in fact, not a member of the relevant authoritative class. This is a misunderstanding of what the appeal to authority fallacy is.
The problem is not whether or not you are a member of a given authoritative class, the problem is that you use as the sum total of your argument your membership in said class.
So no, you did not in fact "hand me my ass." But being Pio, you'll cherry pick half a quote, misapply some logic, and claim victory.