I am not sure if the recent case involving a California State Trooper who was fired for failing to properly police his Facebook account is really a good example of “the three levels of self-awareness.” After all, the case can be seen as a “legal loophole”—a law that allows the employer to fire for a reason not listed in the employee’s contract, or for actions not within the employee’s “scope of employment.
We don’t know why the law was broken about the Texas State Trooper involved in his Facebook account. I think it would be a fairly good idea to start with the case. The law is fairly clear that the Texas State Trooper doesn’t have to be a member of the Texas Bar or a member of the Texas State Police, for example. But even with all that, the Texas State Trooper may not have a Facebook account at all.
The law is actually pretty clear that the Texas State Trooper shouldn’t be in control of Facebook. He’s supposed to go along, and in this case it’s clear that he doesn’t. The only possible reason he has a Facebook account is if he has a Facebook account of his own. If there is a law that says that a state trooper can’t be a Facebook user, then there is a law that says that the Texas State Trooper cannot be a Facebook user.
Now while it is a little strange, it is pretty clear that this isnt a legit law. If it were, then the Texas State Trooper wouldnt have a Facebook account. There is no requirement that a state trooper be on Facebook. Its pretty clear that the Texas State Trooper cant be on Facebook. The law is clearly on the books, but its not enforced.
In a way, this is the perfect example of the “lemmings” fallacy. It is a fallacy that is used when you see some action that is not in the realm of logic.
The lemmings fallacy is a faulty reasoning pattern that happens when you see something that sounds good but it is just not true. For instance, a lawyer might say, “I think we should hire some lawyers, I think it will be good for our company.” But it is not good for your company to have an attorney on staff. That is not good for your company. It is a fallacy.
The lemmings fallacy, like most logical fallacies, is usually not a bad idea. However, there are some times when it is very useful. For example, let’s imagine you have a law firm that is suing a company. The law firm is very successful and makes a ton of money. However, the company is having some financial trouble because of a lawsuit in which they are the plaintiff.
The lemmings fallacy is a fallacy in which a group of people are convinced that, although they may believe that they have made a sound argument, they are actually making up a fallacy. This fallacy is very common in legal circles because of the fact that people feel they must make up arguments to defend their position.
The lemmings fallacy is based upon the idea that every person is trying to do something to impress the group of people that they belong to, and that everyone else is doing the same thing. The argument goes that since everyone else is doing the same thing, each of them must have thought up the same thing, and therefore everyone should have the same idea.
