For example, he nicknamed Hillary Clinton “Crooked Hillary” during the 2016 election. He gives them disparaging nicknames, in an attempt to make himself look better. In fact, Godwin’s law predicts that “as an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches 1.” Read through any comment section and you inevitably someone calling another an idiot, a Nazi, etc. Examples abound for this fallacy, as it is a common tactic in all types of debates. Latin for “against the man,” this fallacy involves attacking the person instead of the argument. Because of this, Democrats and Republicans struggle to have rational debate about gun control and controversial statues, as the Democrats’ position has been distorted by Trump’s lack of logic. Quite comically, he actually mentions the slippery slope, as if he were aware of the fallacy he’s using. Lee statue he said “I wonder, is it George Washington next week? And is it Thomas Jefferson the week after? You know, you really do have to ask yourself, where does it stop?”īoth of these demonstrate flawed logic, in that Trump believes giving in a little bit will snowball to the worst case scenario. Likewise, in response to removal of a Robert E. And all of a sudden everything is taken away, we’re not going to let that happen.” And we have to be very careful about that, you know, they call it the slippery slope. When asked about increased background checks, Trump responded with “The Democrats would, I believe, I think they would give up the Second Amendment, and the people that, a lot of the people that put me where I am are strong believers in the Second Amendment, and I am also. As absurd as this sounds, this faulty argument was actually made when the Defense of Marriage Act was being debated and still today. How does one situation lead to the next? It doesn’t. For example, if a person claims he or she is in favor of gay marriage, then his or her opponent might claim this would lead to people marrying their dogs. This occurs when a person claims one harmless event will lead to another and another, ending in something horrible. Unfortunately, this is one of Trump’s favorite fallacies, and he has used it to derail conversation on pretty much every topic, from the Mueller investigation to climate change. Therefore, Trump’s comments above and many others have reframed the national debates over healthcare, the Second Amendment, and border security into logical absurdities, making them impossible to engage in. In fact, Obama made border security a major issue. And they do not want open borders, as they are simply trying to stop the demonization of immigrants. They are also not trying to destroy the Second Amendment, merely pushing for safer regulations. Democrats are trying to increase access to health care. Of course, no democrat has said or done anything to make this even remotely true. Democrats have become the party of crime - it is true!” Destroy your Second Amendment and throw open the borders to deadly drugs and vicious gangs, because plenty of them are coming across and a lot of drugs. Among many examples, perhaps the most egregious is when he said “They want to take away your healthcare, because our country cannot afford it. Despite how illogical this is, this fallacy is used every year around the holidays.
For example, if someone says “happy holidays” instead of “merry Christmas” to accommodate non-Christians, his or her opponent might say “this is anti-Christian bias and the war on Christianity needs to stop!” Clearly, the second person misinterpreted the point of saying “happy holidays,” and changed their opponent’s argument into something more easily argued against. Like the name suggests, this is when someone distorts their opponent’s argument, making it seem weak so it can be easily destroyed. Unfortunately, today Trump has taken it to an absurd level and left our national debate perhaps beyond saving. And Trump is notorious for doing this.ĭespite the fact that Aristotle first formally identified them in his famous work Sophistical Refutations 2300 years ago, logical fallacies have been commonplace, especially in politics. In practice, this is an effective way to make your opponent’s argument seem incorrect, but in reality has only skirted the issue. For example, one of the most common is the Ad Hominem fallacy, in which your opponent attacks your character instead of your argument. On the surface, they appear logically sound, but under scrutiny they don’t hold up. Logical fallacies are missteps in reasoning, either intentionally or unintentionally, to win an argument.
0 kommentar(er)
