Pop Quiz: A poll for conservatives.

[ClingingMars]

loaded question

gg

- Mars

[RandomGuy]

loaded question

gg

- Mars

actually it isn't.

It does have a very specific and verifiable right and wrong answer though.

[Don Quixote]

Sorry, RandomDude, it is a "complex question."

[RandomGuy]

No, it is not, "...logical to conclude that Bush opponents are lying when they say something bad about the administration...".

Nor, is it logical to conclude that Bush opponents are telling the truth when they say something bad about the administration."

It is only logical to base your judgement, on the veracity of their statements, by comparing them to what is known about the situation about which they speak.

This is the correct answer.

One cannot logically conclude that a statement is true or false simply because of the bias or general veracity of the speaker.

It is logical to subject such claims to increased scrutiny and some healthy skepticism.

This goes both for opponents of the administration, and the administration itself.

[RandomGuy]

Sorry, RandomDude, it is a "complex question."

Actually the question describes the logical fallacy:

Fallacy: Cir stantial Ad Hominem



--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Description of Cir stantial Ad Hominem
A Cir stantial ad Hominem is a fallacy in which one attempts to attack a claim by asserting that the person making the claim is making it simply out of self interest. In some cases, this fallacy involves subs uting an attack on a person's cir stances (such as the person's religion, political affiliation, ethnic background, etc.). The fallacy has the following forms:


Person A makes claim X.
Person B asserts that A makes claim X because it is in A's interest to claim X.
Therefore claim X is false.

Person A makes claim X.
Person B makes an attack on A's cir stances.
Therefore X is false.

A Cir stantial ad Hominem is a fallacy because a person's interests and cir stances have no bearing on the truth or falsity of the claim being made. While a person's interests will provide them with motives to support certain claims, the claims stand or fall on their own. It is also the case that a person's cir stances (religion, political affiliation, etc.) do not affect the truth or falsity of the claim. This is made quite clear by the following example: "Bill claims that 1+1=2. But he is a Republican, so his claim is false."

There are times when it is prudent to su ious of a person's claims, such as when it is evident that the claims are being biased by the person's interests. For example, if a tobacco company representative claims that tobacco does not cause cancer, it would be prudent to not simply accept the claim. This is because the person has a motivation to make the claim, whether it is true or not. However, the mere fact that the person has a motivation to make the claim does not make it false. For example, suppose a parent tells her son that sticking a fork in a light socket would be dangerous. Simply because she has a motivation to say this obviously does not make her claim false.

Examples of Cir stantial Ad Hominem

"She asserts that we need more military spending, but that is false, since she is only saying it because she is a Republican."

"I think that we should reject what Father Jones has to say about the ethical issues of abortion because he is a Catholic priest. After all, Father Jones is required to hold such views."

"Of course the Senator from Maine opposes a reduction in naval spending. After all, Bath Ironworks, which produces warships, is in Maine."

"Bill claims that tax breaks for corporations increases development. Of course, Bill is the CEO of a corporation."

[Don Quixote]

Yes, I can see that one too. Perhaps your logical fallacy -- cir stantial ad hominem -- is clearer than mine (the complex question).

[Yonivore]

So, what do I win, RG?

[RandomGuy]

So, what do I win, RG?

(laughs)

I hadn't really thought about a prize, but that would be appropriate for correctly getting a pop quiz.

How about this:

I will add an extra $10 bucks on your behalf to what I had budgeted to give to Terrilyn Curtis, the foster mother who is taking in the 3 horribly abused children and one newborn infant of Cesar and Amaya Carmona, (click names to see the news story).

My family lives within a couple of blocks of where the trial was being held and was wondering why there were 4 or 5 news vans in the parking lot. I almost wished that I hadn't found out why. That stuff is almost too hard to read once one becomes a parent.

I feel very compelled to do a bit more, but need to talk to a few people first before setting anything else up.

[RandomGuy]

Yes, I can see that one too. Perhaps your logical fallacy -- cir stantial ad hominem -- is clearer than mine (the complex question).

heh, I'm more compe ive than you are...

[Don Quixote]

heh, I'm more compe ive than you are...

NO YOUR NOT IM MORE COMPETETIVE YOU SHUT UP

[RandomGuy]

NO YOUR NOT IM MORE COMPETETIVE YOU SHUT UP

(bows) You got the joke. Some don't.

I am still more compe ive...