HYDERABAD : Language and the ability to communicate is what gives man the preeminent place he enjoys in the species’ hierarchy. The ability to get across complex ideas, clarify and qualify important nuances is what makes them more productive and wholesome.
The flip side, however, is that the same language can be used to mislead and manipulate not just the gullible and naïve, but also the perceptive and well informed. For example, the recent fake QAnon theory that alleged that a cabal of Satan-worshipping paedophiles is running a global child sex-trafficking ring and plotting against Donald Trump, who is fighting the cabal. Boosted by algorithms the misinformation group thrived and spread on social networks to Europe, Brazil, and even Japan.
The steps taken by some news organisations and Twitter to better regulate content and to curb fake news are sorely and surely needed and is long overdue. It is also up to us, to have the necessary knowledge to sift through the details and be able to cull out the untruths, half-truths, and innuendo. “Logical fallacies are errors in reasoning, which notwithstanding their fancy names, are quite commonly used (misused). It’s a skill to be able to recognise such fallacies as it can save a lot of grief, time, money, and dignity,” says Cynthia Davidson, an English professor.
Ad Hominem Fallacy
“An Ad Hominem argument attacks the person, not the idea. In Latin, it stands for ‘against the man’. “Specifically, ad hominems do not debate the idea, but criticise or reject a viewpoint because of the personal characteristics of the person who is advancing that viewpoint,” explains Cynthia. PM Modi’s ‘Yuvraj’ jibe for Rahul Gandhi or Trump’s characterisations of his opponents as ‘Crooked Hillary’ or ‘Sleepy Joe’ are examples that attack the person.
Straw man argument
A straw man argument is an attack on a non-existent opinion. Sometimes, either by accident or by malicious design, debaters will attribute a position to their adversary, a point of view that the adversary had not really made. “It is an easy argument to defeat because it is a mere made-up effigy made out of straw and not the real argument advanced originally,” explains Cynthia. Daughter: I want to pursue an education of my choice.
Parent: Why are you doing this to us? Don’t you love us? Won’t we choose the best for you? This is a classic straw man because the parent is steering the debate away from educational pursuits to a matter of family, love and relationships.
Argumentum Ad Ignorantiam
‘Ignorance is bliss?’ Maybe in a limited context, it is. However, in the world of debates and polemics where opinions are discussed threadbare, ignorance has no place. ‘There is no proof of the existence of God. Therefore, he doesn’t exist.’ ‘There is no proof that God doesn’t exist. Therefore, he exists.’
Both the above arguments use lack of knowledge as their foundation. Ignorance cannot be proof of anything. Ignorance can only mean that we don’t know.
False dichotomy
Sometimes arguments are presented as if there are only two extreme choices available whereas, in reality, a gamut of options really exists. Cynthia says, “It is used in manipulative discourse usually to polarise by degrading one side and elevating the other side.” A parental exaggeration: ‘You better marry that guy that I’ve chosen or you will live a lonely unloved life.’
The Sunk Cost Fallacy
Sometimes we start a task and invest so much time, effort and money in it that we become emotionally attached and fail to let go of it. Certain ventures or even relationships are best cut short rather than continued for appearances or for the faint hope that they can be resurrected. ‘We fight all the time. There is no love in the marriage. But, I’ll just stick with it because I’ve been married for over four years.’ This is frequently true of jobs, educational choices and investments.
— Tamanna S Mehdi tamanna@ newindianexpress.com @tamannamehdi