By couching the debate in terms of equality, it distracts from the move to redefine marriage itself. On the left, the notion of “equality” is actually a red herring in debates over “ marriage equality,” for what is being debated is not that all should have equal access to marriage, but rather how marriage should be defined. (The phrase comes from the story of a man using a strong-smelling smoked fish to divert his dogs from chasing a rabbit.) Thus, when confronted with an issue, the person on stage never responds to the issue but instead distracts the audience by telling a joke, insulting his opponent, etc. This fallacy is one in which the speaker or leader distracts the audience from the issue. Similarly, a certain crown on the right insists that a border wall is the only way to address illegal immigration. For example, “Either you support President Trump uncritically or you are an enemy of conservatism.” Or, “Either you fault President Trump holistically or you are an enemy of America.” On the left, the Green New Deal has committed a cornucopia of such fallacies, arguing, for example, that we must either get rid of air travel and cows (with their mephitic effluvia) and give us free college or the world will perish. It tries to make you think there are only two alternatives regarding a given issue or course of action. (Nice Babylon Bee article here –sorry, couldn’t help it.) Sometimes conservatives commit the fallacy by equating Bernie’s Socialism Lite® or social democracy in general with communism. For example, Pete Buttigieg famously constructed an unprovoked straw man attack against Mike Pence, arguing the Vice President is a hateful bigot because he is an evangelical Christian. It comes from the idea that it is easier to knock down a character made from straw than one made from muscle and bone. It purposefully misrepresents the opposition’s view in order to make its position look better. This fallacy involves argument by caricature. Consider Hillary Clinton’s “ basket of deplorables” comment, her description of Tulsi as “ a Russian asset,” Gabbard’s description of Clinton as “ the queen of warmongers,” or Donald Trump’s descriptions of Carly Fiorina as ugly and as a “horseface.” What could a man that ugly know about anything?” Contemporary politics is a lush environment for the proliferation of personal attacks. For example, “Socrates’ arguments about the good life are worthless. This classic logical fallacy (often called the “ad hominem”) is one in which the speaker insults the opposition rather than directly addressing that person’s arguments or conclusions. Truth by unintentionally using fallacious reasoning.įor these two reasons-not wanting to be duped by other people and not wanting to distort the truth ourselves-it is important for us to be aware of the perennial logical fallacies and distortion techniques. Times, as any of us can do, the charismatic leader accidentally distorts the The truth in ways that even careful observers have difficulty detecting. Sometimes the charismatic leader purposefully distorts So charismatic, so persuasive, that we are easily duped by poor reasons leading People of the rightness of their views and decisions. Very reason these leaders often rise to the top is their ability to persuade Culture, leaders are trying to sell themselves and their views.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Details
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |