Jun 30
Argumentation – The bad and the ugly
I love debates! I really do.. I simply love discussing the facts, opinions and actions of one self and others – with the appropriate argumentation of course. This is something I’ve often loved doing with my family and friends (whom often hate me for it, as I’m kinda strict with correct argumentation) and of course in my work with politics in Radikale Ungdom here in Denmark.
But during all of this over enthusiastic opinion sharing I’ve often come across certain argumentation styles I’ve found .. well, ridiculous! Let’s take a few examples:
Arguments of the form “Everyone knows … “ or “Everybody agrees … “ are inherently false – Always!! No matter what subject you pick, no such subject will be known by all of the general population and no opinion will be shared by the general population. The mere fact that you are having the discussion with someone should tell you that your argument is inherently wrong, as that person clearly does not know or does not agree! This form of argumentation often comes up in emotional subjects like “Everybody agrees child molestation is wrong” – Which is obviously false, since some actively molest children. Or perhaps in another context “Everyone agrees that global warming is real” which is again obviously false, since some don’t believe this to be true.
There is a correct way to use the “Everyone .. something” argumentation form however, you just have to limit your population. So an argument like “All doctors agree ..” might be right, it’s definitely not inherently wrong. Also, in the same category, an argument like “All soldiers know guns can shot” would also probably be correct, while “Everyone knows guns can shot” isn’t!
Let’s take another example of bad use of argumentation: “Abraham Lincoln would have …” - Using what a dead guy might have said, is very very bad argumentation! Actually this is one that Jon Stewart already pointed out (very delicately I might add) on The Daily Show a few months back.
Sadly many actually do this! Like refer to Martin Luther King, Abraham Lincoln, JFK or some other historical figure – but really, how the fuck do you know what that person thinks? Maybe he would have hated your guts?
Hmm another example: “Studies have shown…” A very commonly used argument for some given product or solutions correctness. Yet this seemingly normal expression is probably one of the worst forms yet, since it begs the question: “Which studies?”, and as long as that question can not be answered by the individual, his or her argument doesn’t count for shit! It’s all too common:
Normal guy reads newspaper, sees a headline “Studies show mobile phones cause HIV” and then unquestionably believes this snippet of information to be true. He then tells his friends, his girlfriend, his dad, his teacher, a couple of stoners and perhaps his dog (he’s probably kinda drunk). This then circulates even further with these individuals talking to other individuals, claiming that studies show mobile phones cause HIV and finally, 1 year later, people are so damn scared no one dares use a mobile phone for fear of HIV.
Using an argument like “Studies have shown … “ is the equivalent of saying: “As far as I know and believe …” - that is if you can’t mention the source of course!
So what was this post all about? Well – mainly it was about me getting some frustration out there 
.. I’m tired of people believing arguments like the above are worth anything, and I’m tired of people unquestionably believing everything they hear or read… So really my one goal here, my one morale, is simply:
Be sceptical – Question everything!!
Well – I went for the passing grade in Linear Algebra, but was foiled by the subject I picked.. Stochastic matrices.. Which in itself is not that bad of a subject, but when they suddenly change the subject to linear differential equations and unitary diagonalization – then you know you’re fucked!..
So, as most of you probably know, Barack Obama won the Democratic nomination this week. I have to be honest – I was kinda hoping he would, as I found him to be the most competent of the likely candidates. I really disliked Hillary Clinton from day 1 – She just came off as sad, whiny and untrustworthy – spilling out one unfair attack after the other.
