In his book “Persuasion”, Maarten Boudry raises an important question about the value of focusing on logical fallacies. As someone who has spent a considerable amount of time studying and debating various arguments, Boudry’s doubts about the usefulness of this approach struck a chord with me. In this excerpt, Boudry introduces us to the concept of the “fallacy fallacy” and encourages us to reconsider our reliance on identifying and pointing out logical fallacies in arguments.
The term “fallacy fallacy” may sound like a tongue twister, but its meaning is quite simple. It refers to the mistake of assuming that just because an argument contains a logical fallacy, it is automatically invalid. In other words, the fallacy fallacy is the fallacy of dismissing an argument solely based on the presence of a logical fallacy. This may seem counterintuitive at first, as we are often taught to spot and avoid logical fallacies in order to strengthen our own arguments. However, as Boudry argues, this approach may not always be effective or even necessary.
One of the main reasons why the fallacy fallacy is problematic is that it assumes that all logical fallacies are equally damaging to an argument. This is simply not the case. Some fallacies, such as ad hominem attacks or appeals to emotion, can completely undermine an argument. However, there are other fallacies that may not be as damaging and can even be easily corrected. For example, a straw man fallacy, where an argument is misrepresented and then attacked, can be easily addressed by clarifying the original argument. In this case, dismissing the entire argument based on the presence of a straw man fallacy would be a mistake.
Moreover, the fallacy fallacy also assumes that all logical fallacies are equally easy to identify. This is not always true, as some fallacies can be subtle and require a deep understanding of the argument and its context. It is not uncommon for two people to disagree on whether a particular argument contains a logical fallacy or not. This can lead to endless debates and arguments about the validity of an argument, rather than focusing on the actual content of the argument itself.
Another issue with the fallacy fallacy is that it can distract us from the real issues at hand. Instead of engaging with the substance of an argument, we can get caught up in trying to identify and point out logical fallacies. This can lead to a superficial and unproductive discussion, where the focus is on winning the argument rather than seeking the truth. As Boudry puts it, “the fallacy fallacy can become a game of ‘gotcha’, where the goal is to catch your opponent in a logical fallacy rather than to engage with the substance of their argument.”
This is not to say that identifying and avoiding logical fallacies is not important. On the contrary, it is crucial to have a clear and logical argument in order to persuade others. However, we should not rely solely on pointing out fallacies to discredit an argument. As Boudry suggests, “we should not be so quick to dismiss an argument based on the presence of a logical fallacy. Instead, we should focus on the substance of the argument and address any fallacies in a constructive manner.”
Furthermore, the fallacy fallacy can also lead to a false sense of superiority. It is easy to fall into the trap of thinking that just because we can identify logical fallacies in someone else’s argument, our own arguments must be flawless. This can create a sense of arrogance and close-mindedness, where we are not open to considering alternative perspectives or admitting when our own arguments may contain fallacies.
In conclusion, the fallacy fallacy is a reminder that we should not rely solely on identifying and pointing out logical fallacies in arguments. While it is important to have a clear and logical argument, we should not dismiss an argument solely based on the presence of a fallacy. Instead, we should engage with the substance of the argument and address any fallacies in a constructive manner. Let us not fall into the trap of the fallacy fallacy and remember that the goal of any discussion or debate should be to seek the truth, not to win the argument.