Phil 1102: Critical Thinking
How to manipulate people (and
how you, yourself, are
manipulated)
Rhetoric
• “The art of winning the soul by discourse” –
Plato
• “the faculty of discovering in any particular
case all of the available means of persuasion”
– Aristotle
• So, how do we convince people, given that
valid arguments from true premises are damn
near impossible?
– Intro to how to read Aristotle (2 Examples)
– Using Language
3 ways to convince others
1. we could put the audience a frame of mind
where they are likely to act the way we want
them to.
2. we could convince others that we, as the
speaker, are credible; and therefore, can be
trusted to guide the correct action.
3. we can appeal to logic, reasoning and
rationality.
How to understand Aristotle
• The basic question is “how do you
persuade an audience?”
– Answer 1: appeal to their heart (pathos)
– Answer 2: make them think that the
speaker is ‘one of them’ (ethos)
• Since what we read today are more or
less lecture notes, the conclusions are
not always drawn out explicitly.
Aristotle!
• Chapter 2 can be divided into two parts:
– 2.1-2.11: Pathos (appeal to emotion)
– 2.12-2.17: Ethos (appeal to character)
Aristotle’s three-fold
classification:
Ethos
Pathos
Logos
Appeal to Anger
Appeal to Character Anger <-> Calmness Appeal to Reason
Kindness, Friendship
Logic
Matching
<-> Enmity
Inductive
Character
Fear <-> Confidence
Causal
Shame
Deductive
Pity <-> Indignation
Categorical
Flattery <-> Emulation
Conditional
etc.
Sub-forms that :
• Ethos -> Appeal to Authority (the
argument is good insofar as the
authority is good, and that’s a matter of
‘character’)
• Pathos -> Appeal to Force (ad
bachulum) (insofar as it is an appeal to
fear. If it is an appeal to the force of an
authority, it is ethos)
Other: Argument from Analogy
• Will talk about later.
Anger
Joe?
rhetoricMillerRNC2005.exe
Anger:
The persons with whom we get angry... ...[are]
those who speak ill of us, and show contempt
for us, in connection with the things we
ourselves most care about: those those who
are eager to win fame as a philosopher get
angry with those who show contempt for their
philosophy; those who pride themselves upon
their appearance get angry with those who
show contempt for their appearance; and so
on in other cases.
Anger may be defined as an impulse,
accompanied by pain, to a conspicuous
revenge for a conspicuous slight
directed without justification towards
what concerns oneself or towards what
concerns one's friends. (1378b)
1. those who laugh, mock or jeer at us, for such conduct
is insolent
2. those who inflict injuries upon us that are marks of
insolence
3. those who speak ill of us, and show contempt for us,
in connection with the things we ourselves most care
about. Especially if we suspect that we lack the
qualities they highlight (belittling only hurts if you
suspect that the person belittling you is right. If you
are convinced that he or she is wrong, then he or she
will just appear foolish and mean-spirited.)
1. those who usually treat us with honor or regard, if
they change their behavior
2. On a related point, we get more angry at friends than
strangers
those who fail to return kindness (as it shows
contempt for our kind actions)
3. those who oppose us, even if they are our inferiors
(for this shows contempt for our leadership)
4. For friends especially, those who fail to perceive our
needs (for it shows contempt for us — if they really
cared, they would see we were in trouble)
1. those who rejoice in our misfortunes, or fail to share
our misery when misfortunes befall us (for this, again,
shows contempt)
2. those who are indifferent to our pain
3. those who seem to take particular interest in stories
about our weaknesses or mistakes
4. those who treat us badly in front of those we respect:
either those we admire or those we consider rivals
5. those who slight "what honorable men are bound to
champion — our parents, children, wives or subjects"
(Mom and apple pie?)
1.those who reply with humor when we
are speaking seriously
2.those who treat us less well than they
treat others
3.those who are forgetful with respect to
us, for it shows a lack of care — which
is very close to contempt
Examples
• MoveON Pac ‘Doesn’t get it’
• SBV: all of them…
Calmness
1. those who slighted us involuntarily, or those
who actions were accidental
2. those who treat themselves in the same way
they treat us (as no one can slight
themselves)
3. those who admit their fault and feel sorry;
since they recognize the slight and intend no
more
4. those who humble themselves before us, for
this shows respect, which is the opposite of
contempt
1. those who are serious when we are serious
2. those who have done more kindness than we
have done them
3. those who pray to us and beg for mercy,
since this is an humbling act
4. those who do not mock or slight anyone at all,
or not any unworthy person, or anyone like
ourselves
5. those who we fear or respect (because you
cannot both fear and be angry with a person)
Bobby K…
How to control others?
• In the extreme: Political Force / prison
life:
– Arbitrary rules enforced arbitrarily
– Mindless work
– Rewards given to those who cooperate
– Enforcement by peers
– Divide and conquer
Implicit:
• Arbitrary rules enforced arbitrarily:
• Mindless, repetitive work
– High school
• Enforcement of (organic) arbitrary rules
by peers
Festinger
Cognitive Dissonance
Suppose you were asked to perform a
mindless, annoying task for ½ hour. We
compensate you $20.
Now suppose that you were asked to
perform a mindless, annoying task for ½
hour. We compensate you nothing.
Which task was more unpleasant?
• Festinger showed that people
consistently rated the tasks for which
they were compensated as more
unpleasant than the tasks for which they
were not compensated.
• Why?
The theory is this: People like to have their
minds in balance – so if you throw one side
out of whack, they will believe false things in
order to maintain balance – even if it means
distrusting their own intuitions.
(It wasn’t that bad, but he wouldn’t pay me if it was
painless – therefore, it really was bad, and I just
didn’t notice)
(Bad life? Buy a French car)
Cult-think
• “One of us. One of us.”
– ‘Belonging’ love-bombing
• Being ‘in’ on ‘it’ / knowing something
that others don’t.
– Linux, Mac-users, VW owners, Residents
of the Pacific NW.
• Last: the ‘Calvinist’ rationality.
Marketing and Language…
Some of your aspirations tend to be fairly unrealistic. At times, you
are extroverted, addable, sociable, while at other times you are
introverted, wary and reserved. You have found it unwise to be
too frank in revealing yourself to others. you pride yourself on
being an independent thinker and do not accept other's opinion
without satisfactory proof.
You prefer a certain amount of change and variety, and become
dissatisfied when hemmed in by restrictions and limitations
At times you have serious doubts about whether you have made
the right decision or have done the right thing. Disciplined and
controlled on the outside, you tend to be worrisome and
insecure on the inside.
You have a great deal of unused capacity which you have not
turned to your advantage. you have a tendency to be critical of
yourself. You have a strong need for other people to like you and
for them to admire you.
Our Results?
• 10 respondents, average = 6.4
• Last Fall: 11 users = 5.54
Why generalities?
The voters should assume I have no litmus test on that issue or any
other issue. Voters will know I'll put competent judges on the
bench. People who will strictly interpret the Constitution and not
use the bench for writing social policy. That is going to be a big
difference between my opponent and me. I believe that the
judges ought not to take the place of the legislative branch of
government. That they're appointed for life and that they ought
to look at the Constitution as sacred. They shouldn't misuse
their bench. I don't believe in liberal activist judges. I believe in
strict constructionists. Those are the kind of judges I will appoint.
I've named four in the State of Texas and ask the people to
check out their qualifications, their deliberations. They're good,
solid men and women who have made good, sound judgments
on behalf of the people of Texas.
Claims:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Not be chosen by a litmus test
Be competent
Interpret the constitution strictly
Not use the bench for writing social policy
Look at the constitution as sacred
Not misuse the bench
Not be liberal activists
Be strict constructivists
Be good, solid men and women who make
good, solid decisions
Example: Gore 2000
• Vice President Al Gore, reaching for a
personal example to illustrate the
breathtaking costs of some prescription
drugs, told seniors in Florida last month
that his mother-in-law pays nearly three
times as much for the same arthritis
medicine used for his ailing dog,
Shiloh... (Published on September 18,
2000 by the Boston Globe)
Videos:
• Debate 2, Q 16
• Debate 3, Q 14
Orwell’s advice:
I returned and saw under the sun, that the
race is not to the swift, nor the battle to
the strong, neither yet bread to the wise,
nor yet riches to men of understanding,
nor yet favour to men of skill; but time
and chance happeneth to them all.
Objective considerations of contemporary
phenomena compel the conclusion that
success or failure in competitive
activities exhibits no tendency to be
commensurate with innate capacity, but
that a considerable element of the
unpredictable must invariably be taken
into account.
Orwell
The first contains forty-nine words but only sixty
syllables, and all its words are those of
everyday life. The second contains thirty-eight
words of ninety syllables: eighteen of those
words are from Latin roots, and one from
Greek. The first sentence contains six vivid
images, and only one phrase ("time and
chance") that could be called vague. The
second contains not a single fresh, arresting
phrase, and in spite of its ninety syllables it
gives only a shortened version of the
meaning contained in the first.
Fallacies:
• Embedding in the mouths of others:
– Video 1: Fox News: ad hominem email
– Video 2: Moveon Pac: Richard Clarke
Inverted Fallacy:
• "We assess that Baghdad has begun
renewed production of mustard..."
• "Baghdad has begun renewed
production of mustard...".
• Monday, July 12, 2004
Inverted Fallacy:
• "assesses that the tubes probably are
not part of the [nuclear] program."
• "Most intelligence specialists assess
this to be the intended use, but some
believe that the tubes are probably
intended to conventional weapons
programs."
• Monday, July 12, 2004
USGS
Warming will also cause reductions in the
mountain glaciers and advance the timing of
the melt of mountain snow packs in the polar
region. In turn, runoff rates will change and
flood potential will be altered in ways that are
currently not well understood. There will be
significant shifts in the seasonality of runoff
that will have serious impacts on native
populations that rely on fishing and hunting
for their livelihood. These changes will be
further complicated by sifts in precipitation
regimes and a possible intensification and
increased frequency of extreme hydrologic
events.
Whitehouse
• Warming could also lead to change in
the water cycle in polar regions.
USGS & WH
• The challenge for the USGCRP is to
provide the best possible scientific basis
for documenting, diagnosing and
projecting...
• The challenge for the USGCRP is to
provide the best possible scientific basis
for documenting, understanding and
projecting...
USGS
• In this new phase of the climate science
programs, information that compares
the potential consequences of different
responses to global changes, including
climate change, will be developed in a
form useful to national debate and
decision making.
Whitehouse
• In this new phase of the climate science
programs, information that might allow
comparison of the potential
consequences of different responses to
global changes, including climate
change, will be pursued.
Fallacies of Language
• Equivocation
– Shifting the goalposts
• Straw Man
– Quoting out of context
• Orwell / Luntz
"I did not have sexual relations with that
woman"
I did not engage in any kind of sexual
activity with that woman
– When Clinton meant:
I did not have penetrative sex with that
woman.
‘Last Throes’
BLITZER[The commander of the U.S. Military Central
Command, Gen. John Abizaid] says that the
insurgency now is at a strength undiminished as it
was six months ago, and he says there are actually
more foreign fighters in Iraq now than there were six
months ago. That doesn't sound like the last throes.
CHENEY: No, I would disagree. If you look at what
the dictionary says about throes, it can still be a
violent period -- the throes of a revolution. The point
would be that the conflict will be intense, but it's
intense because the terrorists understand if we're
successful at accomplishing our objective, standing
up a democracy in Iraq, that that's a huge defeat for
them. They'll do everything they can to stop it.
Entertainment:
• See the exchange with Scott McClellan
online – and Jon Stewart’s monologue
on the topic! (dance scotty dance)
Others?
• Bush ‘Victory’
• PFA 11
• SBV ‘Any Questions’
‘No True’
• No true American can support al Queda
• No true Catholic can support Roe v
Wade
Shifting the goal posts
• Dec 11, 2002: White house press release:
• Weapons of mass destruction pose a grave danger. They could
allow America's adversaries to inflict massive harm against our
country, our military forces abroad, and our friends and allies.
Some rogue states, including several that support terrorism,
already possess WMD and are seeking even greater
capabilities, as tools of coercion. For them, these are weapons
of choice intended to deter us from responding to their
aggression against our friends in vital regions of interest. For
terrorists, WMD would provide the ability to kill large numbers of
our people without warning. They would give them the power to
murder without conscience on a scale to match their hatred for
our country and our values.
• G.W. Bush, Feb. 2003, in a speech to
religions broadcasters
• "Chemical agents, lethal viruses and
shadowy terrorist networks are not easily
contained... ... Secretly, without fingerprints,
Saddam Hussein could provide one of this
hidden weapons to terrorists or help them
develop their own. Saddam Hussein is a
threat. He's a threat to the United States of
America."
• Apr 29, 2003: White house press release
• Saddam Hussein launched a large-scale
chemical weapons attack against Iraq's
Kurdish population in the late 1980s, ...
Saddam Hussein continues his efforts to
develop chemical weapons: ...Saddam
Hussein had an advanced nuclear weapons
development program before the Gulf War
and continues his work to develop a nuclear
weapon:...
• Jan 2004: State of the Union:
• Some in this chamber, and in our country, did not
support the liberation of Iraq. Objections to war often
come from principled motives. But let us be candid
about the consequences of leaving Saddam Hussein
in power. We're seeking all the facts. Already, the Kay
Report identified dozens of weapons of mass
destruction-related program activities and significant
amounts of equipment that Iraq concealed from the
United Nations. Had we failed to act, the dictator's
weapons of mass destruction programs would
continue to this day. Had we failed to act,... (State of
the Union, 2004)
Straw Man
– "heart and soul of America is found in Hollywood"
Kerry actually said, while in New York is this:
– "Every performer tonight, in their own way, either
verbally or through their music, through their lyrics,
have conveyed to you the heart and soul of our
country"
Again:
"Today he said, and I quote, ‘We have traded a
dictator for a chaos that has left America less
secure’. He’s saying he prefers the stability of a
dictatorship to the hope and security of
democracy."
What Kerry actually said is this:
"Saddam Hussein was a brutal dictator who
deserves his own special place in hell. But that
was not, that was not in and of itself, a reason to
go to war. The satisfaction that we take in his
downfall does not hide this fact: We have traded a
dictator for a chaos that has left America left
secure..."
Quoting out of context
Where would Christianity be if Jesus got
eight to fifteen years with time off for good
behavior?
-James Donovan, on the floor of the NY
State Senate
(see google)
A test
Judging by the most recent communications that we have received
from Afghanistan in the form of encrypted cables, as well as by
telephone conferences... the situation in Afghanistan has
deteriorated sharply. There, as we know from the previous
cables, [a division of the army] was stationed, and had restored
order, but now we have received news that this division has
essentially collapsed. An artillery regiment and one infantry
regiment comprising that division have gone over to the
insurgents. Bands of saboteurs and terrorists, having infiltrated
from the territory of Pakistan, trained and armed not only with
the participation of Pakistani forces but also of [a foreign power]
are committing atrocities.. The insurgents infiltrating into the
territory... from Pakistan and Iran have joined forces with
domestic [resistance]. The latter is especially comprised of
religious fanatics. The number of insurgents is difficult to
determine, but our [commanders] tell us that they are
thousands, literally thousands.
• Soviet General named Gromyko
reporting to L.I. Breshnev on March 17,
1979.
in 1983, a Soviet journalist named Vladimir
Danchev referred, on air, to the Soviet actions
in Afghanistan as an 'invasion'. The
Communist party preferred the term
'liberation', as Breshnev had pointed out, it
can't be an invasion if the forces had been
'invited' in by the Government to help fight the
terrorist, saboteurs and religious fanatics.
Vladimir Danchev had the courage to call an
invasion an 'invasion', and for that, the
Soviets took him away to be 'cured' of his
'illness'.
Zell Miller, RNC 2004:
Frank Luntz’ Greatest Hits
• Changed the term 'Estate tax' to 'Death tax'.
This change alone changed public opinion
from overwhelmingly opposed to supporting
— without any change in policy. Why?
Because very few of us have estates. In fact,
only the 1% who have estates will be affected
by this tax. But we all die. So we all think that
this tax will affect us. It won't. There was no
change in policy. But perception is all that
matters in politics, and the perception is that
anything called a 'death tax' will affect us.
Frank Luntz’ Greatest Hits
• 'Climate Change' instead of 'global
warming'. The impact of this has yet to
be seen, as the environmental policies
of this administration have been of little
importance to the voters.
• Dubbed the relaxing of pollution controls
the 'clear skies initiative'.
Frank Luntz’ Greatest Hits
• Encouraged the administration and
Republican congressmen and women to use
the term 'War on Terror' instead of 'War on
Iraq'. Again, this is a part of the calculated
strategy to conflate Osama bin Laden and
Saddam Hussein. But as three independent
commissions have said, there was no
connection. Al Queda came to Iraq after the
US invasion.
• 'Tax relief' v 'tax cuts'. For example:
Frank Luntz’ Greatest Hits
• 'Nuclear Option' v 'constitutional option'.
See below.
• On social security: 'privatization' v.
'personal accounts'.
• And most recently: the term 'people of
faith' to describe ultraconservative
judges who were blocked by Democrat
filibuster.
‘Nuclear Option’
• The implication of 'nuclear option' is way
too hot and extreme... Someone comes
up with a cute phrase like 'nuclear
option', and all of a sudden the debate
is named. This is an example of how
cute phrases can kill."
– Frank Luntz, Quoted in the Washington
Post, May 17, 2005
So…
• Republicans started to use
‘constitutional option’ – Orrin Hatch did
so explicitly on NPR– and started
requiring all news organizations to
follow suit (any that did not were labeled
as displaying a ‘left-wing bias’).
The Irony?
• The term 'nuclear option' was coined by
Trent Lott (R-TX) when he was Minority
leader in the Senate. At the time, the
Republicans were filibustering President
Clinton's judicial nominees in exactly
the same way, and the Democrats were
considering changing the rules by which
the Majority can end debate on a
nominee.
Back to Aristotle!
•
•
Recall that ‘anger’ was opposed to
‘calmness’, and that we feel kind
towards “those who have done more
kindness than we have done them”
Thus, to make people feel kind
towards us (or our cause) we should
cultivate a sense that we have done
more kindnesses to others than they
have done to us.
Friendship and Kindness
wishing for him what you believe to be
good things, not for your own sake but
for his, and being inclined, so far as you
can, to bring these things about.(Book
2, S4 Rhetoric 1381b35)
1.Doing kindnesses
2.doing them unasked
3.not proclaiming the fact when they are
done, which shows that they were done
for our own sake and not for some other
reason.
Kindness, is then…
helpfulness towards some one in need,
not in return for anything, nor for the
advantage of the helper himself, but for
that of the person helped. (Book 2, S7
Rhetoric 1385a33)
Enmity
We can also see how to eliminate the idea of
kindness and make our opponents appear
unkind: we may maintain that they are being
or have been helpful simply to promote their
own interest — this, as has been stated, is
not kindness; or that their action was
accidental, or was forced upon them; or that
they were not doing a favor, but merely
returning one, whether they know this or
not— in which case the action is a mere
return, and is therefore not a kindness even in
the latter case.
Fear
•
•
•
•
•
Johnson’s Daisy
Bush’s Horton
Shaw’s Dukakis question
Dukakis ‘Heartbeat’
Helms
Quick:
• If your involved in an accident, is it more
safe to be in a car, a truck, or a bus?
Quick:
• If your involved in an accident, is it more
safe to be in a car, a truck, or a bus?
– Car: 513 deaths / 67,349 = 0.4%
– Truck: 257 / 42,201 = 0.6%
– Bus: 8 / 2,844 = 0.2%
Quick:
• In which state are you more likely to be
killed by a drunk driver (by percentage
of population)?
– Texas
– California
– Maryland
– New Mexico
– Missouri
Quick:
• In which state are you more likely to be
killed by a drunk driver (by percentage
of population)?
– Texas 1106 / 22,118,509 = 5 x10-5
– California 1309 / 35,484,453 = 5.13 x 10-5
– Maryland 176 / 5,508,909 = 9.8 x 10-5
– New Mexico 206 / 1,874,614 =10.9 x 10-5
– Missouri217 / 5,704,484 = 3.8 x10-5
Rhetoric of fear:
• Tuesday, Sept 21: Sen Orrin Hatch (R,
TX): “[terrorists] are going to throw
everything the can between now and
the election to try to elect Kerry”
• Sunday, Sept 19: Sen John Thune (R,
SD): “His [Daschle’s] words embolden
the enemy”
• Sat, Sept 18: Speaker Dennis Hastert (R IL):
“I don’t have data or intelligence to tell me
one thing or another, [but] I would think they
[al Queda ] would be more apt to go [for]
somebody who would file a lawsuit with the
World Court or something rather than
respond with troops.”
• When asked if al Queda would be more
successful under Kerry: “That’s my opinion,
yes”
• Fri, Sept 17: Dept. Sec. Of State Richard
Armitage said terrorists in Iraq are “trying to
influence the election against President Bush”
• Earlier this month: Cheney “If we make the
wrong choice, then the danger is that we’ll get
hit again, that we’ll be hit in a way that will be
devastating”
• And, when asked about the theme of the 3rd
day of the RNC, one of the chair people of the
convention said “Vote for Bush or die.”
• In 2001, Ashcroft said that critics of the Patriot
act “only aid terrorists” and “give aid and
ammunition to America’s enemies”
• In 2003: Rumsfeld said if terrorist think that
Bush’s opponents might prevail, “they take
heart in that, and that leads to more money
going into these activities or that leads to
more recruits or that leads to more
encouragement.”
• In March, 2004, Rep Tom Cole (R OK): “If
George Bush loses the election, Osama bin
Laden wins the election”
• Anne Coulter (Fox News): “It’s
unquestionable that Republicans are more
likely to prevent the next attack” Kerry “will
improve the economy in the emergency
services and body bag industry”
• CNN’s Bill Schneider said al Queda “would
very much like to defeat President Bush”
• Debate 1 question 1&2
• Those wolves…
Non-Political
Mark and Kelly were first-time parents who were blessed with a
high-need baby — especially at night. They were sensitive and
responsive parents, but one day a friend game them a cry-it-out
book, with the admonition, "Now you'll be tempted to give in, but
harden your hearts and in a few nights he'll sleep." As their oneyear-old baby screamed, these sensitive parents stood sweating
and hurting outside his door, afraid to go in and "break the
rules." Each night baby's night waking decreased, as did the
parents' attachment. Baby cried in a feeling of mistrust and cried
the sensitivity right out of the parents. Previously Mark and Kelly
had taken baby Matthew with them everywhere because they
wanted to and it felt wrong to leave him. Well, it was now easier
to leave him. Getaway weekends extended to getaway weeks. A
distance developed between parents and baby. More was cried
out of the family than only night waking.
Aristotle
a pain or disturbance due to imagining
some destructive or painful evil in the
future (Book 2, S5)
So…
• We can’t fear something that has happened,
unless we imagine it happening again
• We can't fear something that causes us only
pleasure, unless we find pleasure painful.
BUT, there are some evils that don't cause us
fear:
– those that are a remote possibility or a long way
off in the future (like an asteroid strike), or
– those that don't cause great suffering to us (like
environmental disaster).
Fear is caused by whatever is imagined to have
great power and that power can cause us
great pain or suffering directly and
immediately.
Note: it's not the actual suffering that causes
fear. We suffer after surgery, but we don't
really fear recovery. The real cause of fear is
the perception of the power to cause
suffering; and it is accentuated if the power
appears to be arbitrary, irrational or relentless
Things we fear:
• those those who have power to do something
to us, have will to do it, and are on the point
of doing it
• those who use their power unjustly
• those whom we have harmed unjustly, if they
have any power at all
• those who are feared by those stronger than
us
• those who have destroyed those stronger
than us
• those who are attacking those weaker
than us, for they might come after us
when they get stronger
• Of these, we don't fear the passionate
and outspoken, but the quite
dissembling and unscrupulous, as the
quietness gives them power
State of the Union, 2002
Iraq continues to flaunt its hostility toward America and to support
terror. The Iraqi regime has plotted to develop anthrax, and
nerve gas, and nuclear weapons for over a decade. This is a
regime that has already used poison gas to murder thousands of
its own citizens -- leaving the bodies of mothers huddled over
their dead children. This is a regime that agreed to international
inspections -- then kicked out the inspectors. This is a regime
that has something to hide from the civilized world.
States like these, and their terrorist allies, constitute an axis of evil,
arming to threaten the peace of the world. By seeking weapons
of mass destruction, these regimes pose a grave and growing
danger. They could provide these arms to terrorists, giving them
the means to match their hatred. They could attack our allies or
attempt to blackmail the United States. In any of these cases,
the price of indifference would be catastrophic.
Aug 2002
• There should be no doubt in anybody's mind
this man is thumbing his nose at the world,
that he has gassed his own people, that he is
trouble in his neighborhood, that he desires
weapons of mass destruction. I will use all the
latest intelligence to make informed decisions
about how best to keep the world at peace,
how best to defend freedom for the long run.
Sept 2002
The danger to our country is grave. The danger to our country is
growing. The Iraqi regime possesses biological and chemical
weapons. The Iraqi regime is building the facilities necessary to
make more biological and chemical weapons. And according to
the British government, the Iraqi regime could launch a
biological or chemical attack in as little as 45 minutes after the
order were given.
The regime has long-standing and continuing ties to terrorist
organizations. And there are al Qaeda terrorists inside Iraq. The
regime is seeking a nuclear bomb, and with fissile material,
could build one within a year. Iraq has already used weapons of
mass death against -- against other countries and against her
own citizens. The Iraqi regime practices the rape of women as a
method of intimidation; and the torture of dissenters and their
children.
Conditions of Fear
• we only fear that which can actually happen
to us (if it has happened before, or to
someone similar, we'll fear it) [Environmental
Devastation v. Pandemic flu v. Terrorist
attack]
• we only fear those who have power over us
[but not too much power – I.e. Iraq v. N.
Korea or Iran]
• we only fear the immediate [Lung cancer]
Confidence
• it is the opposite of fear, and what
causes it is the opposite of what causes
fear; it is, therefore, the imaginative
expectation of the nearness of what
keeps us safe and the absence or
remoteness of what is terrible: it may be
due wither to the near presence of what
inspires confidence or to the absence of
what causes alarm.
• One word: Ashley
Great Uses of Fear
• http://soundsofhistory.com/ChurchillAndRoos
evelt.html
– “I have nothing to offer but blood, toil,
tears and sweat.“… (3:00)
– ‘We will fight them on the Beaches…’ (10:00)
• Churchill’s inauguration of the Battle of Britain
• MP3 Clip
Shame
• ‘Married to Mommy’
..Not to be underthought, VP Dick Cheney and Defense Secretary
Don Rumsfeld also rushed to Gitmo's defense. Cheney
advanced the masterful thesis that the camp had to be kept
open because it held "bad guys." Rumsfeld claimed it must stay
open because taxpayers had invested $100 million US to build it
and spend $90 million annually to run it.
The Senate majority leader, Republican Bill Frist, added, "to cut
and run because of image problems is the wrong thing to do."
Brilliant, Bill. In an earlier time, you might have advised: "Mein
Fuhrer, ignore all that stupid criticism of our concentration
camps. Stand firm!"
Fortunately, decent Americans find the Guantanamo gulag an
outrageous violation of everything the nation stands for. Former
president Jimmy Carter, who has become the country's
conscience in a time of growing totalitarian impulses, demanded
it be closed, as have a growing number of legislators, including
the Republican party's most courageous senator, Chuck Hegel.
...
Sen. John McCain, himself a former POW, is right to call for speedy
trials of Guantanamo's inmates and an end to their indefinite
jailing. But the past three years have shown that people charged
with terrorism are unlikely to get fair trials in post-9/11 America.
A military defense lawyer told Congress this week his superiors
warned that if he represented a prisoner at Gitmo, "only a guilty
plea would be accepted" -- shades of the U.S.S.R. ...
Guantanamo violates the Geneva Conventions, international
and U.S. law. There are reports that in the rest of the secret U.S.
gulags in Morocco, Egypt, Jordan, Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan
and Diego Garcia, even worse crimes are being committed
against those suspected of anti-U.S. activities. ...
Guantanamo, just 150 km from Miami, is not a problem of
image. It is an arrant violation of every American value. It's
worthy of KGB. Close this disgrace now.
Shame
• pain or disturbance in regard to bad
things, whether present, past, or future,
which seem likely to involve us in
discredit; and shamelessness as
contempt or indifference in regard to
these same bad things.
• things we think are disgraceful to ourselves or
to those we care for.
– For example: throwing away one's shield, for that
is cowardly; having 'carnal intercourse' with
forbidden persons, for that is due to
'licentiousness'; making profit in petty or
disgraceful ways, or at the expense of the poor, for
that is due to greed...
• In money matters: giving less help than you
can, accepting help from those worse off,
borrowing when it will seem like begging,
begging when it will seem like asking for the
Pity
• You asked for it!
Pity
• a feeling of pain at an apparent evil,
destructive or painful, which befalls one
who does not deserve it, and which we
might expect to befall ourselves or
some friend of ours, and moreover to
befall us soon.
Note:
those who imagine themselves immensely
fortunate — their feeling is rather insolence,
for when they think they possess all the good
things of life, it is clear that impossibility of evil
befalling them will be included, this being one
of the good things in question. Those who
think evil may befall them are such as have
already had it befall them and have safely
escaped from it; elderly men, owing to their
good sense and the their experience; weak
men, especially men inclined towards
cowardice; and also educated people, since
these can take long views.
Those who are likely to feel
pity:
• those who have dependents (children, elderly
parents, etc) to worry about, for they
understand that evil befall their dependents
through no fault of their own,
• those who believe in the goodness of people,
for those who believe others totally bad
cannot believe that the evil that befalls others
is undeserved,
• those who remember some undeserved evil
that has befallen them, but who are not
currently in danger, for in those cases, the
primary concern is themselves.
Those toward whom we are
likely to feel pity:
• those whom we know, so long as they are not
closely related (for if they were, we would
suffer as well),
• those who are like us in character, age,
disposition, social standing or birth, for it
makes us think that we are vulnerable to the
same evil,
• those who are suffering now, or just recently,
for we don't feel pity for those who suffered
hundreds of years ago
• those with 'noble character', for the suffering
is undeserved.
Indignation
• Pity = bad things happen to those who
don’t deserve them.
• Indignation = good things happen to
those who don’t deserve them
Examples
• Michael Moore’s use of Bush ‘fool me
once’
• SBV (again)
Examples
• Michael Moore’s use of Bush ‘fool me
once’
• SBV (again)
Envy
• You guessed it: eHarmony
• envy is a pain at seeing good fortune
befall our equals
– Good fortune befalling our those who are
less talented, less deserving, worse than
us = indignation
– Good fortune befalling those who are more
talented, more deserving, better than us =
emulation
People who are likely to feel
envy:
• those who have much, but not everything
• those who are distinguished, esp. for wisdom
or good fortune, for they often need to be
more distinguished, or worry about someone
overtaking them
• ambitious men, especially those who aim at
reputation, for they are never satisfied
• small-minded men, for they feel everyone is
great
People toward whom we are
likely to feel envy
•
•
•
•
those with undeserved goods
those who have the same ends as us
those with whom compete in love and sport
those whose possession of a thing is a
reproach on us (say, if there is only one, and
he or she has it)
• those who have what we believe we ought to
have (success, money, etc), or have what we
once had, but have lost (youth, e.g.)
Emulation
• a pain caused by seeing the presence,
in persons whose nature is like our own,
of those things that are highly values
and are possible for ourselves to
acquire; but it is felt not because others
have these goods [which is envy], but
because we have not got them
ourselves.
Those towards whom we feel
emulation
• those of lofty positions, if we believe
that they are deserving of those
positions
• those to whom we are related, for we
believe them our equals, and hence,
that we are deserving of what they get
• those who have the ability to give
pleasure to their friends and neighbors,
as we would like to do it.
Flattery
• Edwards Closing
• Dell
• Liz Taylor
Dell
Liz Taylor
Hope
• Debate 3, closing statement
• Kerry Ad, ‘jobs’
Ethos
Ashley
Wine
7UP
Trust
• Who do we trust?
– Those we know.
Kerry Identity 1
Kerry Identity 3
Trust
• Who do we trust?
– Those we know.
– Those with whom we share values.
Bush Values 1
Bush Values 2
Kerry Values 1
Kerry Values 2
Trust
• Who do we trust?
– Those we know.
– Those with whom we share values.
• Who to undermine trust?
– Undermine public biography
– Undermine perception of shared values
• Do I really have to tell you where I’m
going with this?
Cultivating Identity
Campaigns that worked
•
•
•
•
Credit cards
Fashion
Cars
AND: Product placement
The Last Ride!
• Eeek!
The King:
Oddities, Fallacies, and other
bad arguments:
• Analogies
• Enthymemes
– Example
– Authority
– Maxims
• Miscellaneous Fallacies
Analogy
1)Anti-miscegenation laws were
discriminatory
2)anti-miscegenation and anti-gay
marriage laws are alike because:
Anti-miscegenation
laws were
supported via a
'defense of
traditional
marriage'.
Anti-gay marriage
laws are supported
via a 'defense of
traditional
marriage'.
Therefore:
• Anti-gay marriage laws are
discriminatory.
Enthymemes
• small change (12:32:26 p.m.)
– Nope , I was a limited resource before the market
and now I am not sure that any market activity is a
good idea. I am considering investing in a fireproof
mattress and hoarding gold.
• Dan Seiver (12:34:33 p.m.)
– It is always darkest before the dawn!
• ajw (12:36:11 p.m.)
– So, do you think we're close to a "dawn"?
• Dan Seiver (12:36:56 p.m.)
– getting close!!!
My favorite example in the
entire semester:
Now, I am terrible when it comes to guys. I think he's
interested in me, but it seems like once we have a
connection, we both back off and kind of freak out.
I really want something to happen, but I don't
know a) if he's interested in the first place, or b)
how to let him know I'm interested without making
the work environment weird. (Someone mentioned
another woman here who was interested in him,
and his response was, "You don't shit where you
eat.") Am I crazy? Should I back off and see if he
pursues me? Should I make my intentions known?
What the hell?
How is 'don't shit where you eat' supposed
to constitute an argument?
A deduction dealing with practical subjects.
(S21, Rhetoric)
But, for the most part, we mean:
An enthymeme is an argument that has
one or more premises implied or
assumed, not mentioned explicitly.
Enthymemes and Analogies:
Examples
Enthymemes, Authority and
Analogies: Examples
• EJ Dionne ‘Conservative’
• Stalin and Bin Laden
• The Nazis and Everyone
Example
• An argument from example is any
incomplete argument, or enthymeme,
that references a event, past, present or
fictional, to make the case. The event is
not used as data point in an inductive
argument to establish a general
conclusion, or as an analogy pre se. It is
used as a kind of illustrative case or
paradigmatic example for the current
situation.
Authority
• Pat Robertson
• Dr. Phil
• Etc...
One produces an argument from authority
if the only reason given in support of a
conclusion is the endorsement of a
putative authority in the field.
Other Character-based
persuasions
• “Help, Mom, there are liberals under the
bed!”
• “Why Mommy is a democrat”
• http://www.brawnyman.com/products/ad
s.html
• And:
http://www.brawnyman.com/innocentesc
apes/indexbroadband.html
Attack it here
Arguments from Analogy
1. A and B are alike with respect to {a, b, c
…}
2. A has property x.
3. Therefore, B likely has property x.
Either that {a, b, c…} are not
relevant to having x – or that B
does not share {a, b, c…} with
A.
When animal models go bad:
Cont’d
"Once we understand the biology of
Escherichia coli, we will understand
the biology of an elephant".
Jacques Monod.
Modeling
• Models (of all sorts, but particularly
animal models) are analogies – so are
we to discard all animal
experimentation?
Animal Model hall of fame:
The Thalidomide Tragedy
• Thalidomide is a anti-inflammatory and
immunosuppressant that was prescribed to
expectant mothers in the 1950s
• Thalidomide is a teratogen in a few rabbit
breeds and in seven species of primates.
• It is not a teratogen in at lest 10 rat strains, 15
mice strains, 11 rabbit breeds, two dog
breeds, three hamster strains, and eight
species of primate.
In reverse:
• Aspirin, insulin, epinephrine, and certain
antibiotics (I don’t know which) are
known to cause malformations in
rodents
Argument from analogy
• A and B are alike with respect to
properties {a, b, c…}
• A has property x
• Therefore, B should have property x as
well.
Argument from model:
• A and B are functionally isomorphic with
respect to properties {1, 2, 3…}
• A has the functional property n
• Functional isomorphism usually betrays
similar underlying structures.
• Therefore, B should have functional
property n as well.
Argument from model:
• A and B are functionally isomorphic with
respect to properties {a, b, c…}
• A has the functional property x
• Functional isomorphism usually betrays
similar mechanism.
• Therefore, B should have functional
property x as well.
A Question:
• Is the Thalidomide story a case of
pseudo-science, or just science done
badly?
• Is this evidence that animal models are
unreliable, or is it just that these studies
were poorly performed?
Problems for Many Sciences.
• How do we observe / experiment on the
internal workings of something (I.e.
cognition)?
Sternberg’s Experiment
Sternberg’s Results
Response Time = 398+38(S)
Gravitational Force =
(A constant called G) x (mass of first object) x
(mass of second object)
(the square of the distance between them)
Mechanism
Mechanism
Mechanism
Mechanism
Mechanism
Models & Mechanisms:
• Mechanism: entities and activities
organized to produce a phenomenon
(teleological?)
• Entities and activities organized in such
a way as to realize a functional role.
‘Model’?
• A Model is a description of some
phenomena / on
A model is verdical insofar as corresponds to
the actual phenomena it seeks to model. (‘fit’)
A model, just like a ‘law’ or a ‘theory’ explains
phenomena / on and can be used to make
predictions about novel / unobserved aspects
of the phenomena it seeks to model.
Therefore, it is plays the same roll as ‘law’ or
‘theory’ in the H-D method or D-N model of
explanation.
Models
Modeling
Formulae
relating
observables
‘Mathematical
Models’ in Psych
V = d/t
Investigation of
underlying
structure
Discovered Models
‘Experimental
Systems’
Invented Models
Mathematical
Symbolic
Neural Network
F=ma
Categorization of different Models
/ Systems:
1st use: relating observables
• The most simple use of a mathematical
model is to fit a mathematical function to
some data collected in an experiment. That
function can then be used to make
predictions about novel or unobserved
behavior.
• Sternberg’s Memory Scanning Model
– Response Time = 398 + 38(Memory Set Size)
• De Castro and Brewer
– Intake of food = s(Number of People Present)0.22
Sternberg’s Results
Response Time = 398+38(S)
Intake = s(People)0.22
Gravitational Force =
(A constant called G) x (m1) x (m2)
(d2)
The importance of Mathematical
Models:
Quick: what is the most
famous mathematical model
in the US right now?
The BCS Formula
• ‘Fit’?
• Data: team record, opponent’s record
(‘strength of schedule’), poll rankings
over the season, team losses & ‘quality
wins’.
Example: Oklahoma 2000?
• AP & Coaches poll end of season rank = 1.
• Average rank over the course of the season=
1.86.
• Average of AP & Coaches poll + average over
season = 2.86.
• (Thanks to Richard Billingsley at ESPN for
the explanation).
Strength of schedule
• Add the opponent’s records together =
73 Wins, 62 losses.
• Drop wins against teams that were not
1-A, and you have 70W.
• Drop losses from opponent’s schedule
that were against OK, and you get 50
losses.
• Total: 70 Wins, 50 losses.
Opponent’s winning %.
• The winning percentage is 70/120 = 58.3% or
0.583.
• 0.583 * 2/3 = 0.3889
• Do the same ‘opponent’ calculation for each
of the opponent’s opponents and weight it by
1/3 = 0.1749
• Add these 2 together and you get 0.5638
Now…
• Rank all the teams according to this ‘strength
of schedule’. OK is 11th
• Finally, take that rank / 25 = 0.44.
• Add ‘Team losses’ (0 for OK) and ‘Quality
wins’ (0 for OK).
• Add that to ‘Poll average’ and you get 3.30.
New BCS:
•
I. Harris Interactive Poll (1/3rd)
Replaces the AP Poll. The first poll will be released
September 25, then weekly through December 4. A
team's score in the Harris poll will be divided by
2,825, which is the maximum number of points any
team can receive if all 113 voting members rank the
same team as Number 1. (Example: 2,825 / 2,825 =
1.0. If a team receives a total of 113 voting points, an
average of 25th place, their BCS quotient of this
component would be .04. (1.0 / 25 = 0.04).
New BCS:
•
II. Coaches Poll (1/3rd)
A team's score in the USA Today poll will be divided by 1,550, which is
the maximum number of points any team can receive if all 62 voting
members rank the same team as Number 1. (Example: 1,550 / 1,550 =
1.0. If a team receives a total of 62 voting points, an average of 25th
place, their BCS quotient of this component would be .04. (1.0 / 25 =
0.04.)
(Better understanding the polls: In both human polls, voting
members fill out their own top 25 rankings ballot. Each team receives 125 points in reverse order of the way they are ranked. The 25th place
team on each ballot receives 1 point, 24th place gets 2 points, 23rd
receives 3 points... first place receives 25 points.)
New BCS:
•
III. Computer rankings (1/3rd)
Six computer ranking systems will participate. The
highest and lowest rating of each team will be thrown
out and the remaining four will be averaged. The
current participating computer rankings are:
Peter Wolfe
Wes Colley
Sagarin
Seattle Times
Richard Billingsley
Kenneth Massey
New BCS:
•
A = Harris Poll
B = Coaches Poll
C = Throw out the high and low of the six
computer rankings for each team. Add the
remaining four. Divide that total by four.
Result: A+B+C = Total Score
(thanks to collegefootballpoll.com for the
explanation)
http://www.collegefootballpoll.com/bcs_standings.
html
http://www.collegefootballpoll.com/bcs_explained.
html
‘Mathematical’?
– Obvious: algebra / calculus
– Recursive functions
– Game Theory
• Other kinds of models
– Physical (geology)
– Virtual
• Neural Network
• Symbolic
– Animal
• In Vitro
• In vivo
Scientific Reasoning
Conclusion
If I’m right that the main structure of explanation
in scientific inquiry is the investigation of
underlying mechanisms, then…
1. Correlational / observational studies are
primarily used for establishing the parameters of
the mechanism’s behavior.
2. Modeling is a fundamental, essential part of
scientific activity.
3. Models serve the same roll in scientific inquiry
as Popper’s ‘laws’ – they entail falsifiable
predictions.
4. The line between science & pseudoscience is
more clear:
Psychology v. Astrology
Phenomenon explained /
predicted: human behavior
and personality.
Mechanism: beliefs and
desires interact to
determine human
behavior, which beliefs
and desires get
precedence in any one
choice is influenced by the
hodge-podge of previous
experiences and genetic
dispositions we call
‘personality’.
Phenomenon
explained / predicted:
human behavior and
personality.
Mechanism: the forces
of the planets at time
of birth.
Biology v. Creation Science
Phenomenon to be
explained: Variation of
species over time and
space.
Mechanism: Natural
Selection (random
mutations are replicated if
they help the creature
reproduce by (a)
increasing survival in the
environment (b) changing
the number of offspring
the creature has or (c)
increasing the chances
that that will creature
Phenomenon to be
explained: Variation of
species over time and
space.
Mechanism: ?
Evaluating Competing
Mechanisms
Ptolemaic Astronomy
Copernican Astronomy
Phenomenon:
Phenomenon:
Parameters:
Fit the location of the planets & stars in
the sky
(They’re equal on this one)
“Other” External Values:
The Copernican system is far simpler and
more elegant.
Venus
Venus
Galileo deduced that:
If the Ptolemaic system is correct, then
Venus should not show phases. And
If the Copernican system is correct, the
Venus should show phases.
Venus shows phases.
Therefore, the Ptolemaic system is not
correct.
REVOLUTION!
‘Real’ Revolutions as
metaphor.
• Scientific Revolutions are those ‘noncumulative developmental episodes in
which an older paradigm is replaced in
whole or in part by an incompatible one’
Thomas Kuhn The Structure of
Scientific Revolutions
Analogical points:
1. Revolutions are inaugurated by a
‘growing sense, often restricted to a
segment of the political community,
that existing institutions have ceased
to adequately meet the problems
posed by an environment that they
have in part created’
2.Revolutions often seem revolutionary
only to those whose paradigms are
affected to them.
3. Success of a revolution necessitates, in
part, the ‘relinquishment of one set of
institutions in favor of another, an in the
interim, society is not governed by
institutions at all.’
Conclusion:
• Well, that’s the point:
– During revolutions, society is divided into
competing camps or parties – one seeking
to defend the old, others seeking to replace
it with new.
– (There may be competing new camps as
well)
– Once that kind of polarization occurs,
political recourse fails.
• The parties are fighting over the legitimacy of
institutions by which political decisions can be
made – for that very reason, there is no
political mechanism for adjudicating between
the parties.
• So, the parties must ‘take to the streets’ –
appeal to something other than political will
(such as God, history, etc) or resort to force.
• The success of the winner is
determined not by political institutions,
but by extrapolitical institutions – by the
very fact that they replace those
institutions by which they legitimize
themselves.
Therefore, by analogy…
• Scientific revolutions gain legitimacy not
by factors internal to science, but by
extra-scientific methods, such as social
factors. And this is precisely because
the issue at stake is the legitimacy of
factors internal to science.
Some analogies are just better
than others
1) How many properties are, in fact,
shared between the target and the
analogical organism?
2) Are the shared properties relevant to the
predicated property (conclusion)?
3) How varied are the instances used in
the analogical case? (i.e. the problem
with Thalydomide studies)
Fallacies:
• Hasty analogy (too few properties)
• Irrelevant analogy (properties not
relevant)
• Shallow analogy (no robust data
available)
Attacking Authority?
• You know this already: it's all about trust
– and we undermine trust just like we
undermine character: attack the
motivations, the public biography, the
qualifications, etc.
Example
In early 2005, it was revealed that the
Bush administration had paid Armstrong
Williams, a conservative commentator
and columnist $241,000 to promote their
"No Child Left Behind" act in his
newspaper columns and appearances on
the talk shows.
Is Mr. Williams a legitimate authority on the
subject of educational policy?
Fundamentalism
The site you are about to enter contains
the Gospel truth on an important, hotbutton issue. This Gospel truth includes,
but is not limited to: Sodomy is an
abominable sin, worthy of death. "If a
man also lie with mankind..." Godhatesfags.com
Warning!!! To God's Elect: Leave Sweden NoW!!! "And I head
another voice from heaven, saying, come out of her my people,
that ye be not partakers of her sins, and that ye receive not of her
plagues." Rev. 18:4
... Sweden's doom is no irreversible! With the imprisonment of Ake
Green, Swedes have allowed the filthy sodomite agenda to be
completely fulfilled.. With this act, Sweden has drawn to it the
wrath and mocking of God! "I also will laugh at your calamity; I will
mock when your fear cometh; When your fear cometh as
desolation, and your destruction cometh as a whirlwind; when
distress and anguish cometh upon you...
THANK GOD FOR ALL DEAD SWEDES!!!
... Unconfirmed numbers of Swedes are dead as a result of the
tsunamis which ravaged Thailand and the other lush resorts of
that region, and thousands more are unaccounted for, either still
rotting in the tropical conditions or buried, as they deserve, as
asses in mass graves (see Jeremiah 22:19). Scarcely a family in
Sweden has been untouched by the devastation. Bible preachers
say, THANK GOD for it all!
The living GOD that created us made us to
be two halves of a whole, male and
female (it was Adam and Even, not Adam
and Steve). Scripture says that
homosexuality is an abomination before
GOD...
Quick history of the movement
• In 1920, a journalist and Baptist layman
named Curtis Lee Laws appropriated the
term 'fundamentalist' as a designation for
those who were ready "to do battle royal
for the Fundamentals."
(http://religiousmovements.lib.virginia.ed
u/nrms/fund.html)
1925: Daily Mail 24 May 8: Mr. William
Jennings Bryan... has been exerting the
full force of his great eloquence in a
campaign on behalf of what is termed
'Fundamentalism'. (OED)
1922 Contemp. Rev. July 20 The
fundamentalist creed. Ibid. 21 The
Fundamentalists have been fortunate in
their non-ministerial leader [sc. W. J.
Bryan].
Basic theses:
• A commitment to a particular text as the
authority in all matters, and the belief that
their interpretation of that text is literal,
that is, uninterpreted.
• A rejection of all other forms of
reasoning and knowledge formation,
especially empirical science.
• The use of violent language and imagery,
especially when talking about those who
reject their interpretation.
Another Form of authority: ‘folk’
wisdom
• We have a saying in the United States, it's a
saying that "friends don't let friends drive drunk".
Ladies and gentlemen, we have an alcoholic at
the wheel of American foreign policy, named
George W. Bush, and we the people of the United
States of America need your assistance to reach
in, grab the keys from the ignition and say no, we
will not allow you to drive the vehicle of
international peace and security over the cliff of
war. Thank you very much for being here today.
Thank you.
– Scott Rider, UN Weapons inspector, Hyde Park
Corner
Maxims
1)Friends don't let friends drive drunk
2)Bush is drunk, and the President 'drives'
the country.
3)England is a friend of the US.
4)Therefore, England shouldn't let Bush
drive the US.
Question: Will the US administration manage to forget
our disagreements? As soon as the war began, you,
Mr. Vershbow, hinted that America might make some
decisions not in favor of Russia.
Vershbow: Of course, the harshness of our
disagreements, especially in the course of the last
debates in the UN, caused strong displeasure among
Americans. One of instances of this displeasure was
the draft law aimed at punishing Russian companies
by excluding them from the process of restoration of
Iraq. However, the US administration has not
supported this draft law.
We have a saying: "It takes two to tango." We need to
give up ideological arguments and start practical
There is no part of the means placed in the hands of
the Executive which might be used with greater effect
for unhallowed purposes than the control of the public
press. The maxim which our ancestors derived from
the mother country that "the freedom of the press is
the great bulwark of civil and religious liberty" is one of
the most precious legacies which they have left us. We
have learned, too, from our own as well as the
experience of other countries, that golden shackles, by
whomsoever or by whatever pretense imposed, are as
fatal to it as the iron bonds of despotism. The presses
in the necessary employment of the Government
should never be used "to clear the guilty or to varnish
crime." A decent and manly examination of the acts of
the Government should be not only tolerated, but
encouraged.
• Inaugural Address of William Henry Harrison
THURSDAY, MARCH 4, 1841
• When two elephants fight... Nigeria, “the
grass,” suffers: An editorial in "KWENU",
a Nigerian web site. In this case, the
elephants are the US and the UK. The
grass is Nigeria.
• Medicine for Dry Bone: A sermon from a
United Methodist minister, reprinted on a
Christian inspirational web site. In this
case, the elephants are parents, and the
grass is their children.
• Armed Conflict and Environment - Enviro Fact
Sheet 24: A 'fact sheet' distributed by the South
African grocery store chain 'Pick and Pay'. In this
case, the elephants are the two sides in a number
of armed conflicts in Africa, and the grass is the
environment.
• The $200 million disinformation campaign: Social
Security privatization cabal will break the bank to
convince you to break yourself. An editorial on
'WorkingForChange.com', the publication of
Working Assets Long Distance, a telecom
company that donates its profits to progressive
causes. In this case, the elephants are the two
sides are trial lawyers and big business, the grass
Fallacies of Relevance
Classified
•
•
•
•
•
ad hominems
Appeals to Authority
Appeals to Emotion
Non Sequetors
Red Herrings
ad hominems Classified
• ad hominems
– ad hominem (basic) = irrelevant personal information
• Abusive / Humiliation: The funniest ad hominem in the history of
Televised debates.
• Circumstantial (Of course you support tax cuts, you’re wealthy)
– Common Abusive forms:
• Poisoning the well = preemptive attack
• ‘Genetic’ fallacy = attacking the origin of the idea (the idea’s
history), not the idea itself
• Guilt by association = attacking an idea because of those who
have held it in the past
– To Quoque = “You too”
• inconsistency
Abusive
• Abusive ad hominems
QUAYLE: I have as much experience in the Congress
as Jack Kennedy did when he sought the presidency.
I will be prepared to deal with the people in the Bush
administration, if that unfortunate event would ever
occur.
WOODRUFF: Senator Bentsen.
BENTSEN: Senator, I served with Jack Kennedy, I knew
Jack Kennedy, Jack Kennedy was a friend of mine.
Senator, you are no Jack Kennedy. (Prolonged
shouts and applause)
Circumstantial
• Circumstances = the circumstances of
the individual attacked, instead of their
argument
– Note: There are ‘good’ cases of this – I.e.
self-interest. Think of Enron, or Haliburton
Appeal to Money
• Equating cost (or lack thereof) w/ value
– That’s expensive, therefore it is good.
– (Linux): It’s free, therefore it must suck.
– Anyone seen that ad for Focusyn (?) where
the woman says “The let you try it free – it
must be good!”
Appeal to Age / Novelty
• Equating youth (the latest) w/ value
– It’s new (young) therefore, it must be good
– Netscape 7
Poisoning the well
• “There he goes again”
• “My opponent is going to propose lots of
big new social programs”
• “Let me introduce the next guest. An
columnist known for her wildly liberal
views…”
‘Genetic’ Fallacy
• Atheists often have difficult relationships with
their fathers. That’s why they can’t accept the
truth of the Heavenly father.
• Careful: History does tell us important things,
and many, many people who make
arguments seem totally unaware of history
(I.e. the people who wrote The Bell Curve, but
Gould will make that point for me).
To Quoque
• Explicit: “How can you call me … when you
… all the time!” (Flip-flopper?)
• Subtle: Attacking consistency: How can you
call your self a vegetarian, when you would
accept life-saving drugs that were tested on
animals!
• Related: What you would do, given the
chance. “Make no mistake, he would do the
same thing to me if he could!”
• "Rich hire lawyers and accountants for
a reason — to stick you with the bill.
We’re not going to let him tax you,
because we’re going to win…" Bush:
(quoted in EJ Dionne's column,
Washington Post September 24, 2004).
Inconsistency
A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin
of little minds
– Ralph Waldo Emerson ‘self-reliance’
Emerson
The other terror that scares us from self-trust is our consistency; a reverence for our
past act or word because the eyes of others have no other data for computing
our orbit than our past acts, and we are loath to disappoint them.
But why should you keep your head over your shoulder? Why drag about this
corpse of your memory, lest you contradict somewhat you have stated in this or
that public place? Suppose you should contradict yourself; what then? It seems
to be a rule of wisdom never to rely on your memory alone, scarcely even in acts
of pure memory, but to bring the past for judgment into the thousand-eyed
present, and live ever in a new day. In your metaphysics you have denied
personality to the Deity, yet when the devout motions of the soul come, yield to
them heart and life though they should clothe God with shape and color. Leave
your theory, as Joseph his coat in the hand of the harlot, and flee.
A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds, adored by little statesmen and
philosophers and divines. With consistency a great soul has simply nothing to
do. He may as well concern himself with his shadow on the wall. Speak what
you think now in hard words and to-morrow speak what to-morrow thinks in hard
words again, though it contradict every thing you said to-day.--"Ah, so you shall
be sure to be misunderstood."--Is it so bad then to be misunderstood?
Pythagoras was misunderstood, and Socrates, and Jesus, and Luther, and
Copernicus, and Galileo, and Newton, and every pure and wise spirit that ever
took flesh. To be great is to be misunderstood.
Recent
• 'John Kerry and the liberals in congress'
• Bush PFA 02
• NARAL's ad on John Roberts (video)
Non Sequetor
Red Herring
Guilt by association
• Hilter cited Nietzsche in Mien Campf.
• Therefore, Nietzsche is dangerous.
• An Anarchist assassinated W. McKinley
in 1908 (?), and Anarchists started the
Hay Market Sq. Riot in 1889.
Therefore, all anarchists are bombthrowing, gun-toting lunatics.