Fire Hydrant of Freedom

When I was in high school, I had the good fortune to have an English teacher that also taught a course in logic.  At grade 10, I had my first exposure to both formal and informal logic.  One of the things that has stuck with me over the years has been an appreciation for the informal fallacies of logic.  This does not mean that my arguments are necessarily more logical, only that I was exposed to the concepts of a course in logic.

http://science.jrank.org/pages/9301/Fallacy-Logical-Informal-Fallacies.html

http://attitudeadjustment.tripod.com/Books/Logic.htm

From the above site:

"The Misuse of Appeal to Laughter: Diverts attention from the central issues and stifles serious thought and analysis.   "Anyone who accepts the conclusions of my opponent would also be forced to accept the view that the tail wags the dog."

The Appeal to Pity (Argumentum Ad Misericordiam): Replaces relevant evidence for a conclusion with a bid for the sympathy of an audience.   "John deserves a 'C' in this class since his parents have sacrificed to send him to college and he will not graduate if he receives a lower grade."

The Appeal to Reverence: Replaces relevant evidence for a conclusion with a bid for respect for traditions.   "We must beware of foreign entangling alliances since Washington, the founder of our nation, warned us against taking such a course of action."

The Bandwagon Fallacy: Appeals to an interest in following the crowd and doing as they do rather than to adequate evidence justifying a conclusion.   "You ought to buy a small European sports car as all members of the smart crowd now own one of these cars."

The Common-Folks Appeal: Appeals to attempts to secure acceptance of a conclusion by the speaker's identification with the everyday concerns and feelings of an audience rather than on the basis of adequate evidence.   "I'm sure that you will recognize that I am more competent than my opponent. When I was in high school I had to get up at four-thirty every morning to deliver papers. In college I was barely able to make C's and had to do janitorial work in order to make ends meet to put myself through school. Therefore, I would make a better Congressman."

Appeal to the Gallery (Argumentum Ad Populum): Seeks acceptance of a point of view by an emotional reaffirmation of a speaker's support of values, traditions, interests, prejudices, or provincial concerns shared widely by members of an audience.   "As you union members know, I am a champion of the labor movement, and seek to eliminate exploitation of the common worker by big business. Therefore, you know you can trust my judgment when I say that this agricultural legislation will be good for the country."


Much of political rhetoric makes use of arguments that are based on informal fallacies.  For example, to nullify an argument by placing it in a disreputable larger category is one example the informal fallacy of logic called "Name Tagging"

"Name-Tagging: Assumes the attachment of labels to persons or things constitute evidence for conclusions about the objects to which the labels are applied."  How many of the above short  list of fallacies can you identify from the recent conventions?


Its amusing to listen to political speeches with an ear tuned to pick up informal fallacies of logic.  Quite frankly that includes some of the arguments put forth on these boards.

Do you think that it is reasonable to purposefully recognize when informal fallacies are being used and to point them out as a means of furthering a discussion?  In other words, if someone is making an argument based on such premises is it a requirement of reasoned discourse to point it out?

Perhaps this is a bit of a rhetorical question.

So I will broach another topic...what constitutes proof?  How do you know when something is true?  How do you distinguish between opinion and fact?  What is a fact?

This kind of "thinking about thinking" is important.  For example, highly persuasive, emotional argument (name calling for example) is not about the truth yet much political rhetoric and even argument that occurs between colleagues is filled with this and other fallacious arguments.  If the average person is not educated in fundamentals of argument then it is harder to find the truth is it not?

When you listen to politics is it possible to identify people who are trying to find the truth versus people who are trying to win?  Is winning what matters?  Do the ends justify the means?  If political speeches become so bent on persuasion that they freely invoke informal fallacies and this is considered to be acceptable, is this not an example of the ends justifying the means?

Perhaps I have been watching too much CNN!  As usual, I offer my thoughts in the interest of open discourse.

Karsk




 

"THE BOYS PROJECT  http://www.boysproject.net/

The mission of The Boys Project is to help young males develop their capabilities and reach the potential that their families and teachers know they have. The Boys Project seeks to accomplish for young men what the Girls Project so successfully accomplished for young women--- to increase academic skills, to increase college success, and to develop the confidence, drive, and determination to contribute to American society.



THE "BOY CRISIS"


Since the late 1970's, young women have soared in college attendance while young men have stagnated. Young men's literacy is declining. Many young men are disengaging from school. Young men are less likely to be valedictorians, to be on the honor roll, and to be active in organizations like student government. Young men are more likely to get D's and F's, to be suspended or expelled from school, to drop out of school, and to commit suicide.

We are losing young boys to a sense of failure that comes from schooling poorly adapted to their needs. We are losing adolescent males to the depression that comes from feeling neither needed nor respected. We are losing young men to life tracks that include neither college nor any other energetic endeavor.

A large, sullen, poorly educated group of men will not keep the nation vital in the twenty-first century. The nation needs the energy, initiative, and ambition of its young men as well as its young women. "