Add this Page to Facebook!   Submit to Twitter   Submit to Reddit   Submit to Stumble Upon   Pin It!   Fark It!   Tell A Friend  
Printer Friendly Page Save As Favorite Save As Favorite Get Embed HTML Code View Article Stats
4 comments

Sci Tech

Skepticism Triggers -- Signs of Poor or Deceptive Arguments

By (about the author)     Permalink       (Page 1 of 2 pages)
Related Topic(s): ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; (more...) ; ; , Add Tags  (less...) Add to My Group(s)

Must Read 3   Valuable 3   Well Said 2  
View Ratings | Rate It

Headlined to H2 10/13/09

Become a Fan
  (7 fans)

opednews.com

As readers and editors we often need to make judgments about the veracity of an author's assertions on topics where we lack personal knowledge and expertise. Here is my list of signs and signals that herald an argument that is not well grounded in objective fact:

1. Extreme or absolute phrasing. (Words like always and never which allow for no exceptions.)

2. Characterizations. Adjectives that attribute merit or adjectives that demean without factual support. (Outstanding authority John Smith". Discredited activist judge Jim Jones ")

3. Citation of anonymous authority. (A nationally famous physician states ")

4. Absence of contrary information. (Writer withholds or fails to discuss dissenting opinion and conflicting data.)

5. Ad-hominem arguments that appeal to feelings rather than reason.(Many rants are passionate and evoke prejudices while lacking factual substance.)

6. Ad-hominem phrasing that attacks the character of an individual.

7. Innuendo, insinuation an indirect statement that implies something without actually asserting it.

8. Metaphors and similes that grossly oversimplify, usually diverting attention from the inconvenient complexity of reality. (A great way to finesse flawed logic.)

9. Denial. The refusal to even consider well known conflicting information, dismissing it or ignoring it.

10. Sophism. Clever or fallacious argument that leads to a wrong conclusion. Sophism can look like a rational, reasonable argument, but usually ignores some facts and embellishes others to make a case. Connecting some of the dots, omitting others, to show a false pattern. Patternicity that imagines or creates meaning from noise.

11. Misapplied authority Seeking to attribute authority to the opinion of someone whose expertise does not extend to the topic. (Medical opinions of a Disk Jockey)

12. Fear mongering.

13. Hate.

14. Sensational assertions.

15. Too good or too bad to be true.

16. Arguments that assert a conspiracy that would be hard to conceal -- one that would require the silent complicity of a large number of diverse people. (In real life, leaks happen, whistle-blowers surface, etc.)

Next Page  1  |  2

 

Richmond Shreve is a former Senior Editor at OEN, a writer, and an author of short stories. His "Lost River Anthology" (amazon.com) was released in March 2009. His "Instructor Candidate Manual" (lulu.com) is widely used by motorsport clubs to train (more...)
 
Add this Page to Facebook!   Submit to Twitter   Submit to Reddit   Submit to Stumble Upon   Pin It!   Fark It!   Tell A Friend
[SERIES]
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.

Writers Guidelines

Contact Author Contact Editor View Authors' Articles

Comments

The time limit for entering new comments on this article has expired.

This limit can be removed. Our paid membership program is designed to give you many benefits, such as removing this time limit. To learn more, please click here.

Comments: Expand   Shrink   Hide  
4 comments
To view all comments:
Expand Comments
(Or you can set your preferences to show all comments, always)

Excellent by Rob Kall on Tuesday, Oct 13, 2009 at 12:02:27 PM
Satirical language by Perry Logan on Tuesday, Oct 13, 2009 at 8:20:24 PM
Discernment by Richmond Shreve on Tuesday, Oct 13, 2009 at 9:48:02 PM
I concur by Doc "Old Codger" McCoy on Tuesday, Oct 13, 2009 at 8:27:48 PM