Yes, David Kramer is susceptible to the fallacy of "affirming the consequent" -- just because the Nazis opposed smoking doesn't mean that everyone who opposes smoking is a Nazi. X implies Y is not the same as Y implies X.
Here is another example of Kramer committing this fallacy: http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewrw/archives/58125.html (the part where Kramer claims someone claimed Rothbard was a Marxist).
Yes, David Kramer is susceptible to the fallacy of "affirming the consequent" -- just because the Nazis opposed smoking doesn't mean that everyone who opposes smoking is a Nazi. X implies Y is not the same as Y implies X.
ReplyDeleteHere is another example of Kramer committing this fallacy: http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewrw/archives/58125.html (the part where Kramer claims someone claimed Rothbard was a Marxist).