Logic Failures And Fallacies In Political And
Public Policy Arguments: A Guide For Electors
By: Steve Gutschick
1. Claim
2. Reason
3. Empirical evidence
Example: Aggregate mining is bad [value claim]
because it pollutes the air [reason] as shown in multiple studies done by the
Environmental Protection Agency and the American Lung Association [empirical
evidence].
I have attended many Joint Twin Lakes – Randall Smart Growth Commission meetings only to hear our opponents act on conviction and not reason. Their arguments have been most often false. Their arguments primarily have been constructed to generate emotion (most often unfounded fear) and not debate. Here is what you should look out for:
Examples: Housing growth lowers taxes. Gravel
mining will bring in more tax revenue.
Both of these arguments are not supported by reason or fact (empirical evidence). Here the truth, as supported by facts, is just the contrary.
Example: Don’t trust Tom’s views on the mining proposal.
He’s a vegetarian. Don’t pay attention to Robert’s views on Smart Growth.
He’s a liberal.
Oftentimes when people can’t find fault with an argument, they will attack the arguer, substituting assertions about the person’s character, which is irrelevant to the argument, in place of analysis, reason and evidence. Ad hominem means “against the person”.
Examples: A survey of Twin Lakes taxpayers
confirmed that all of them drank milk as children. Therefore, milk causes
taxes. A farmer has been elected to the Randall town board and that’s why we
have a controversy concerning A-1 zoning.
Post hoc, ergo propter hoc is Latin for “after this, therefore because of this”. The error involved here is to mistake sequence for cause. A true argument must establish how one thing causes another.
Examples: People in Illinois needed to dig deeper
wells because of the gravel operation there. Environmentalists are Democrats.
There is a difference between association and correlation. Just because two or more thinks are linked, it does not prove that any one causes another. In the first example, it certainly may be true that deeper wells needed to be dug AND a gravel operation existed nearby, but that does not prove a correlation (one caused the other).
Examples: The Smart Growth Law is anti-development
so let me tell you about the loss of tax base.
In 2001, real estate values declined 12% and if we accept this plan they
will decline faster. The Concerned Citizens interviews prove we need and want a
lot of development.
This is the result of basing claims on insufficient or unrepresentative evidence. Making claims based on a small sample is always dangerous. Stereotypes are often the result of hasty generalization. Old news may no longer be news – just because slavery was once sanctioned by the federal courts does not warrant the claim that it always will.
NON SEQUITUR
Examples: Jane Doe opposed the Nippersink road
project. She will therefore oppose the gravel pit. Mark will be a terrific supporter because he
has a great sense of humor.
A non sequitur occurs when two statements linked in the grammatical form of a traditional claim-reason sentence don’t in fact connect logically. Non sequitur means “does not follow”.
Example: The chairperson (or clergyman or
millionaire or local hero) supports the proposal it must be okay.
These fallacies ask us to accept as support for an argument the fact that influential people (or a crowd) already support it. But unless the supporters are themselves authorities in the field, their support is irrelevant.
Examples: You can’t turn a politician into an
ordinary person any more than you can turn a turnip into a rose. You know you
can’t teach old dogs new tricks and you can’t fight city hall.
To mistake an analogy for identity is a false analogy. If you see an analogy between twenty-first century America and ancient Rome that analogy can form the basis of an hypothesis that America will decline, but it cannot be used to PROVE that America will decline.
Examples: The gravel pit is good for the local
economy because it fuels the local economic engine. The pit is injurious to
your health because it harms your body.
Circular reasoning occurs when you state a claim and then, usually after rewording it, you state your claim again as a reason.
Examples: Either you support us or you are against
us. America – love it or leave it.
You see this a lot in political campaigns. It is always a mistake to reduce complex matters to a choice of two alternatives. The false division fallacy omits the possibility of more than two positions – either a middle ground, a synthesis or a new way of representing the problem to eliminate the dilemma.
------------
I am sure that in your everyday life you have heard many of these false arguments. Maybe even from the one you love! They are unbelievably common.
As you attend meetings, hearings, debates and presentations,
keep these fallacies in mind. When making your own argument, make it a good
one. Make a CLAIM and give a REASON for that claim and site some EVIDENCE.
You don’t have to have the empirical data at hand, just point your audiences
to the source of your evidence. It most cases that’s our web page www.gravelisthepits.com.