This fallacy occurs when it's argued that because authorities disagree on an issue, no reliable conclusion can be reached, thereby downplaying the credibility of those authorities.
Esta falácia ocorre quando se argumenta que, por haver desacordo entre autoridades sobre um assunto, nenhuma conclusão confiável pode ser alcançada, minimizando assim a credibilidade das próprias autoridades.
| Fallacy | inflation of conflict |
|---|---|
| Definition and Examples | Description:Reasoning that because authorities cannot agree precisely on an issue, no conclusions can be reached at all, and minimizing the credibility of the authorities, as a result. This is a form of black and white thinking -- either we know the exact truth, or we know nothing at all. Logical Form: Authority A disagrees with Authority B on issue X. Therefore, we can say nothing meaningful about issue X. Example #1: My mom says that I should study for at least 2 hours each night, and my dad says just a half hour should be fine. Neither one of them knows what they are talking about, so I should just skip studying altogether. Explanation: A disagreement among experts does not mean that both are wrong, the answer is a compromise, or that there is no answer to be known; it simply means that there is disagreement -- that is all we can infer. Example #2: Scientists cannot agree on the age of the universe. Some say it is 13.7 billion years old, some say it is only about 13 billion years old. That’s a difference of almost a billion years! It should be clear that because there is so much disagreement, then the 6000 year old universe should be carefully considered, as well. |
Tags: fallacies
Learn with these flashcards. Click next, previous, or up to navigate to more flashcards for this subject.
Next card: Attack failure state stating position topic constantly questions.
Previous card: Small sample dramatic vivid events statistical x majority
Up to card list: Obscure but useful english vocab, logical fallacies and CBT