Posts in "Logical Fallacies"

By Benjamin Levine at 1:29PM

Aug 10, 2011

The "Respect Your Elders" Fallacy

As a young person, I have heard the saying "Respect your elders" numerous times from almost everyone in my family as well as teachers and coaches; basically anyone in an authority position has uttered those words to me. In fact, I'm writing this because somebody in my family a few days ago pulled the age card on me. I have to admit that I have a serious problem with it -- though it is not because I'm a kid who just likes to disobey authority. It's a bit different than that.

Giving respect to somebody merely on the basis of their age is rather arbitrary and, well, idiotic. Remember, even fools grow old. Age means quite little to me when it comes to judging the respectability of individuals (look at Congress, which consists of all adults). Think about this: Where do kids learn most of their bad habits? Their elders. Who exposes kids to violence the most? Their elders. Who decides to place an unsurmountable debt on the youth in America? Their elders. I could go on forever, but the point should be clear: Many -- if not most -- adults are not exactly the best role models and therefore young people should be skeptical about immediately granting them authority and/or respect.

5 Reasons You're Not Winning Debates

The marketplace of ideas is alive and well online. Any time you post a link or comment, you can expect an explosion of differing opinions, and I cherish these friendly debates. While I'm always willing to listen to anther's input, I can't help but think that Douglas Adams was right: "All opinions are not equal. Some are a very great deal more robust, sophisticated and well supported in logic and argument than others."

In the world of debates online or otherwise, there are winners and losers. If you're losing, here are five likely reasons why (which apply to offline discussions as well):

1. Your argument lacks evidence. You can spout your opinion all you want, but when it comes down to convincing someone you're right, "I said so" just doesn't cut it. It's possible you're basing your argument on your own personal feelings rather than specific principles and empirical evidence. Avoid generalizations. Stick to specific facts that you can cite.

2. Your argument relies on a logical fallacy. Red herring? Ad hominem? Strawman? Even if the other participant(s) can't specifically name what you're doing wrong, they'll know it just doesn't sound right. Check out this great article, and make sure your argument is sound in its logic.

3. You're viewing the other participant(s) as the enemy. The other participant(s) are not the personification of the ideas you're arguing against. Rather, view them as friends seeking truth. Don't make the argument personal, and keep it friendly. Everyone is more open to the ideas of their friends than the ideas of their enemies.

4. You've lost credibility. Often I see people who have difficulty expressing themselves or find they have no real evidence to back their argument. These people turn to cursing and insults. Cursing is the refuge of the inarticulate, and insults make the other participant(s) personally blinded to any truth your argument could potentially have. Avoid both.

5. You're just plain wrong. Have you considered it? Surely you're not always right. Maybe you need to step back from the conversation and ask yourself, "Could I be wrong here?" There's nothing wrong with changing your opinion. If someone else is showing consistent evidence to convincingly convey their point, consider that perhaps they could be right. If you're not willing to look at the evidence, then why are you even debating someone?

Posted in:

3 comments

By Elliot Engstrom at 9:28PM

Apr 2, 2010

Logic vs. Government

My latest column at the Daily Caller analyzes the logical fallacies contained in base progressive thought, using Jon Stewart's recent critique of libertarians as a perfect example of an illogical progressive argument, and then applies this analysis to the recent healthcare bill.

...An analysis of the history of government reveals that even government actions with good intent usually end up resulting in negative consequences. Just consider the governmental policies over the past 50 years intended to make home ownership affordable for all Americans. Such actions led directly to an economic collapse that specifically hit the housing market, and thus homeowners, like never before...
...With this view of logic in mind, one can now understand why libertarians are so upset with the recent health care reform. The government-minded leftist would argue that those against the reform do not think that everyone should have access to quality health care, or were content with the current system. Neither is true, and it is in fact often the libertarian’s desire to see affordable health care for as many as possible that drives the protests of Obamacare...

Read the rest here.

Posted in:

1 comment

By Bonnie Kristian at 5:08AM

Dec 25, 2008

Does government really keep us safe?

This past semester I took a course in logic, which included a very extensive discussion of a little over 15 major logical fallacies, such as the straw man argument or argument ad verecundiam, or appeal to false authority. By the end of the semester, my roommate - who was also in the class - and I would have whole conversations attempting to call each other out on fallacies (incredibly geeky, I know). Anyway, formal knowledge of logic and logical fallacies is particularly helpful in politics, because political rhetoric is frequently rife with unnoticed logical errors (I'd recommend a logic
Read more here

Posted in: