[pasquinelli]

logical fallacies are interesting. in logic, it doesn't matter what the objects are, just give them letters for names. a logically valid argument always holds no matter what you substitute the variables for; logically invalid arguments don't always hold no matter what you substitute the variables for; a logical fallacy is when you think an invalid argument is a valid one.

there's a tendency to fall into a fallacy of thinking an argument must be wrong because it's invalid. in real life, everyone does actually care what the objects being discussed are, and restricting yourself to logical validity would constrain your thinking to the point of uselessness. by dismissing a logically invalid argument out of hand because it's logically invalid, you're falling into your own fallacy, because to assume what's being claimed is false just because what's being claimed doesn't hold for everything itself doesn't hold for everything. for instance, if i tell you not to believe someone's claim because they cheat on their spouse, you can't assume they are lying about that claim, but you also can't assume they aren't lying about it.

so if someone tells you a person is motivated by greed to make an argument, yes, it isn't necessarily true that their argument has to be wrong--here's a cookie--but that also doesn't mean they aren't decieving you. what do you know about the subject other than what this potentially interested party just told you?

anyway, pay attention to when you fall for the fallacy fallacy, it's a window into your own ideology.

[topaz0]

Agreed, and worth pointing out that the op did not even claim that the argument was wrong -- just that there might be reason to look for bias in it.

[kilolima]

Identifying logical fallacies is a 1-pass spam removal system. Identifying and blanket dismissing arguments based on logical fallacies reduces the low-effort noise and allows the worthwhile arguments to be heard.