Identifying errors in reasoning isn't the same as explaining why someone is wrong, though. Given the basic definition of an argument as a structure linking premises to a conclusion, a fallacy is simply a flaw in the structure. It doesn't invalidate the premises or the conclusion, only how they relate to one another. So while you're certainly free to attack the structure behind a conclusion, really you're better off attacking the conclusion itself with an argument of your own.
> Given the basic definition of an argument as a structure linking premises to a conclusion, a fallacy is simply a flaw in the structure. It doesn't invalidate the premises or the conclusion, only how they relate to one another.
True, and there's a name for that logical error -- it's the "fallacy fallacy" or "argument from fallacy", the error of assuming that, because there's a fallacy in one's argument, therefore the conclusion must be wrong.
> So while you're certainly free to attack the structure behind a conclusion, really you're better off attacking the conclusion itself with an argument of your own.
Yes. On the other hand, such a reply may serve to strengthen or clarify an argument, and is therefore sometimes appropriate.
