Page 8 - SeptOct2020MFM.indd

For example, ‘ e story is true, it says so on the internet. Straw Man – A ‘straw man’ argument is an informal
ey are just repeating what they assume to be true, fallacy whereby someone gives the impression of refuting
because the source says it is true. an argument, while not addressing the main premise of
the argument under discussion. e strawman argument
Hasty Generalizations – for example ‘this is the best song is a cheap and easy way to make one’s position look
in the world!’ If we haven’t literally listened to all the songs stronger than it is. Using this fallacy, opposing views are
in the world, we cannot logically make that statement. characterized as “non-starters,” lifeless, ruthless, and
wholly unreliable. By comparison, one’s own position
So, hasty generalizations are one of the most di cult will look better for it. You can imagine how strawman
fallacies to ‘disprove’, as we do not have limits on what is arguments and ad hominem fallacies can occur together,
su cient evidence. We make hasty generalizations ‘all of demonizing opponents and discrediting their views. One
the time’ – that is a perfect example right there because who engages in this type of debate is said to be ‘attacking
we do so many other things with our time, so logically we a straw man’ – they distort or misrepresent an opinion or
are not doing anything ‘all of the time’ …except perhaps argument, making it easier to defeat.
breathing! Straw Man and Slippery Slope work well together – an

Hasty generalization may be the most common logical example of this might be:
fallacy because there is no single agreed-upon measure for A: We must wear seat belts to reduce deaths from car
“su cient” evidence. Is one example enough to prove the accidents
claim that, "Poplar Montana is the center of the universe!” B: Oh great, chain us to the car – don’t you realize that
What about 12 examples? What about if 37 out of 50 wearing a seat belt will restrict blood ow to your body
examples of locations that are the center of the universe? and reduce oxygen ow? Its just another way for the man
to control us.
ere is no set rule for what constitutes “enough”
evidence. In this case, it might be possible to nd Slippery Slope – this fallacy is pretty much summed up
reasonable comparison and prove that claim is true or by its name; it is an debate or discussion that starts with a
false. But in other cases, there is no clear way to support relatively insigni cant rst event leads to a mare signi cant
the claim without resorting to guesswork. e means of event, which in turn leads to a more signi cant event, and
measuring evidence can change according to the kind of so on, with each step becoming more and more improbable
claim you are making. When we don’t guard against hasty and rapidly descends to a (usually) catastrophic conclusion.
generalization, we risk stereotyping, sexism, racism, or It’s hard enough to prove one thing is happening or has
simple incorrectness. But with the right quali ers, we can happened; it’s even harder to prove a whole series of events
o en make a hasty generalization into a responsible and will happen. at’s a claim about the future, and we haven’t
credible claim. arrived there yet. We, generally, don’t know the future with
that kind of certainty. e slippery slope fallacy slides right
e Ad Hominem – ad hominem translates from the over that di culty by assuming that chain of future events
Latin as ‘against the man’; in the vernacular it is known without really proving their likelihood.
as ‘mudslinging’ or name-calling. Ad hominem fallacies A bit like the “seat belt” example above, Slipper Slope goes
are considered to be uncivil and do not help creating a from A to B to Z …very quickly!
constructive atmosphere for dialogue to ourish. is “Either you love me, or you hate me.”
fallacy is a favorite on social media and in the political “If you don’t agree with me you are not right with the
arena – the rejection of someone else’s opinion or point of Maker, the sun will stop shining, and you will be the
view by attacking the person directly – calling someone reason the world comes to an end.”
an idiot, or including an insult pertaining to their physical
appearance, background, race, political leanings, etc., Bandwagon Fallacy – ever heard the term ‘to jump on the
which are irrelevant to the argument. bandwagon’? is fallacy assumes something is good, right,
or true because other people think it is. e Bandwagon
But ad hominem is more than a simple insult, it is fallacy is an umbrella term for several fallacies that are
used as if it were an argument or evidence to support a almost identical – the ad populum fallacy (‘to the populus’
conclusion and proves nothing about whether the person’s – meaning something is accepted due to being popular) and
argument was true or false. In this way, ad hominem can be consensus gentium (‘consensus of the people’- meaning
unethical, seeking to manipulate opinion by appealing to acceptance of something by relevant authorities or people).
irrelevant foibles and name-calling instead of addressing Bandwagon fallacy is something used in advertising, the
core issues. e use of ad hominem o en signals the point media and in politics – making something attractive due
at which a civil disagreement has descended into a “ ght.” to association with something or someone who is popular
Whether it’s siblings, friends, or lovers, most everyone – it’s the classic premise that ‘9 out of 10 cats prefer it’!
has had a verbal disagreement crumble into a disjointed
shouting match of angry insults and accusations aimed at e Bandwagon fallacy has a darker side – we see it
discrediting the other person. When these insults crowd ‘repeated’ on social media – the blind acceptance of a claim
out a substantial argument, they become ad hominins. or action because a vast number of people appear to agree
with it, does not make it right or justi ed.
Montana Freemason Page 8 Sept/Oct 2020 Volume 96 No. 5