3rd lecture of [[PA Logic]] by [[Stephen Hicks]] at [[Peterson Academy]] ## Informal Fallacies ### Subjectivism > I want X to be true, therefore X is true. Subjectivism is when we say something is true simply because one wants it to be. Fear of bad news would exemplify subjectivism. Being willfully blind and dismissive of objections or evidence against me is a dangerous form of subjectivism. ### Appeal to Majority > Many people believe X, therefore I believe X. Popular belief could serve as a clue that something may be worth looking into, but is by no means an indicator of truth in any way in and of itself. Popular beliefs can be dangerous, and history shows. Peer pressure partially explains why appeal to majority is so often adopted despite being seemingly ridiculous. Various psychological experiments showed that humans generally have a need to conform to group belief, perhaps due to a strong need to belong. Solomon Asch had an experiment that showed students even feel sorry and a need to apologize for disagreeing with their group. ### Appeal to Authority > Expert says X is true, therefore I believe X is true. A failure of independent judgement. Advertisement agencies' favorite tactic. It is perfectly reasonable to rely on experts in their own field, but we should always know the reason behind even expert recommendations, and make independent judgements. Barriers to overcome this might involve a social discomfort in going against authority, and there's also laziness. Milgram's shock experiments showed that psychological reasons factor into our tendency to appeal to authority. People suspend independent thinking and judgement when under authority. ### Ad Hominem > X says Y is true, but X is (some problematic category), therefore Y is false Dismissal of somebody's arguments based on somebody's race, gender, age, or any other trait of the person, which has nothing to do with the arguments themselves. Another variation of this might be dismissing somebody in virtue of their hypocrisy. ### Appeal to Force > X is true because I say so (backed up with threat) Coercion using threats. ## How Important is Reason? ### Pro Reason > Logic supersedes faith. Many philosophers such as Huxley tells us to follow our reason as far as it would take us. We have to always be honest in assessing the evidence. ### Anti Reason > Faith supersedes logic. On the death and resurrection of Jesus, Tertullian says that "it is certain—because it is impossible." Kierkegaard takes on a similar stance to say that the paradoxical, non-rational nature of religious doctrines is evidence of its transcendence and truthfulness. ### Faith and Reason Compliment Each Other >Logic and faith can unite. People like Galileo take the position that faith and reason are not opposed to each other, and can co-exist. Our faculties of reason are god-given, and we ought to use that. --- Back to: [[PA Logic]] Previous Lecture: [[Concepts & Our Cognitive Hierarchy]] Next Lecture: [[Fallacies and Cognitive Biases]]