not agreeing with a person is not necessarily a logical fallacy. It could be a difference in assessment of what info is factual. In order to assess a contradiction in logic, one must first verify that there is no contradiction in facts.
I’m more making a jab at how libs will just declare our argument to be fallacious (usually with “whataboutism” as their favourite) in order to dismiss the argument without actually reading it. It’s the “argumentum ad liberales dissensio” fallacy. We disagree with liberals so our argument must be fallacious, they just need to spin wheel to pick one.
not agreeing with a person is not necessarily a logical fallacy. It could be a difference in assessment of what info is factual. In order to assess a contradiction in logic, one must first verify that there is no contradiction in facts.
I’m more making a jab at how libs will just declare our argument to be fallacious (usually with “whataboutism” as their favourite) in order to dismiss the argument without actually reading it. It’s the “argumentum ad liberales dissensio” fallacy. We disagree with liberals so our argument must be fallacious, they just need to spin wheel to pick one.