Error 404: Logic Not Found

Brains are awesome, wish everyone had one.

We all have come across people who mistake the strength of their feelings for the strength of their logic (look around…yes, now we are on the same page.) The problem is a mind heated with the emotion of deep-seated belief, or simply stubborn ego will never concede they lost. They will raise their voice or cite some unknown study. They will never concede but that is acceptable. The problem is they don’t play by the rules. The rules of logic.

The man who says “Aliens exist. Why else do we have no proof to show they don’t?” or the politician who argues “Mr. Jones’ tax plan isn’t worth considering. What could a person who works for the government know about taxes?” All such ravages on human thoughtfulness are termed as formal fallacies (logical fallacies sound oxymoron-ish, so let’s stick with this) Formal fallacies is the usage of faulty reasoning. You can turn on the news panel debates and you will get the hang of it within minutes.

Now, a difference of opinion is natural, likely, and welcome but a formal fallacy is a very well decorated piece of drivel. It is a blight on the thinking of man, yet we all fall prey to it (ahem... if we are not the ones using it) The question arises how to fix the ERROR 404: Logic Not Found?

Cui Bono?

To understand fallacy and why not to indulge them one must understand the concept of argumentation or discussion itself. We argue to gain wider perspectives, gain insights into differing opinions, and counter-check our own beliefs. An untested belief might be convenient but it is stale. We do not however argue to be part of the “widely accepted” or “generally agreed” but understand our locus on the spectrum of belief.

This begs the question of who actually benefits from an argument, the man — who won the argument through a flawed line of argumentation and reasoning or the one who listened, grew, and pondered over facts or opinions that challenged his stand. While competitive arguments are a different ball game, we must understand that everyday arguments are not competitions but a method to accommodate and collaborate in a better fashion.

Arguments that open the mind and declutter it from a "one-track thought process" are the ones that can actually be quantified as debate or argument. Rest is the tussle of human words for the sake of it — “Aggressive Small Talk” if you like. This brings us to the part where I convince you not to entertain decorated drivel i.e. formal fallacy.

But we cannot open people’s brains for them (or can we?)

For Your Sake, Do not Compete.

The most important thing to understand about fallacious arguments is winning against them is not possible. The only way out is to not entertain them. Do not drill logic. I know it makes your blood boil when people go around with fallacious logical constructs (look at them all smug). But I pray you not to show them where they are going wrong because they might have another fallacy up their sleeve.

“Arguing with a fool proves there are two.”

I know you just cannot stand the plunderers attacking reasoning but illogical as they are, they are assets. Test your patience against such people. Tell yourself if you withstand “Earth is flat” or “Everybody likes Mr. Smith! You should vote for him too!” you can withstand everything. Please do not compete with them for your own sake.

I understand that avoiding this is not possible in all setups. Say for instance in a workplace meeting where keeping quiet will be conceding an important matter. Similarly, some setups require flexing. Oh! we don’t judge you. What to do when you find yourself entangled in such a situation?

You have to dish it right back. So here is a method of spotting some formal fallacies and countering them.

#1 False Dichotomy

You either agree with me or you are a dim-witted bobblehead (I don’t mean it, It is an example of False Dichotomy.) The unnecessary restriction of available choices of belief. The Black & White fallacy. Where the number of possibilities can be many but they are reduced to create the impression that the given argument is the best stand. In the above example, You can agree with me and still be dim-witted, or you can disagree with me and be a genius. You get the hang. A favorite tool of politicians, doesn’t sound familiar?

You either like this cartoon or you don’t have a sense of humor.

Here are some examples of a false dichotomy:

a. How can we help immigrants when there are homeless Americans on the streets?

b. You cannot call yourself an ally of Israel and criticize their interactions with Palestine. If you do criticize the nation of Israel then that makes you anti-Semitic and means you invariably support terrorists.

Countering them is easy: come up with something even more delirious: say since they do not agree in the universal brotherhood of mankind, they must be cannibals.

#2 Ad Ignorantiam

Remember “aliens existing because we have no proof they don’t”? Yeah. Here the premise is not the problem, the reasoning is — having no proof to the contrary is a very thin ice to tread upon. No one can prove that God exists; therefore God does not exist. These are very fragile arguments.

Counter them by turning their arguments around: We have no proof that Aliens exist, thus they don’t.

Ad ignorantiam is used more often than we might think. Next time listening to an election campaign speech, watch out for sneaky ad ignorantiam.

#3 Appeal to Sentiments

Claim X is made without evidence. In place of evidence, emotion is used to convince the interlocutor that X is true.

Say for instance —

Power lines cause cancer. I met a little boy with cancer who lived just 20 miles from a power line who looked into my eyes and said, in his weak voice, “Please do whatever you can so that other kids won’t have to go through what I am going through.” I urge you to vote for this bill to tear down all power lines and replace them with monkeys on treadmills.

Explanation: Notice the form of the example: assertion, emotional appeal, request for action (conclusion) — nowhere is there any evidence presented. We can all tear up over the image of a little boy with cancer who is expressing concern for others rather than taking pity on himself, but that has nothing to do with the assertion or the conclusion.

Sometimes a “How dare you?” or “You are walking on corpses” rhetoric is simply an appeal to emotions. However you cannot logic your way through emotions, Man is essentially an emotional being.

Hitler appealed To each emotion — Fear, Hatred, and Pride.

Man: The Emotional. Man is essentially driven by a plethora of emotions. Logic is neither priority nor an end in itself. Also one must know that while the number of formal fallacies is about 200, the disarming effect of emotion is infinite.

Logic dictates emotion directs. Logic can take you from A to Z, emotions can take you beyond. Logic is constant, emotion is momentary. Logic can be missing in some people, emotion lies in all. You can crush with logic, you can conquer with emotions.