Week 6, post 2 (Fallacy files).

Fallacy is exactly what drew me to take a philosophy class in the first place, specifically this class Critical Thinking. The concept of argument as an art form based on correct reasoning and logic felt not interesting, but essential in mine and any ones journey to a higher education. One who achieves such a feat immediately has a higher expectation placed on them, and reasonably so.

As noted at the beginning of this page it is stated that the fallacies listed range from obvious to examples that are a bit more obscure in scope. One of my favorite, and perhaps the simplest of them all was an act, or rather trick of reversing ones presented reasoning, or logical fallacy, by one Penn Jillette of the magic/comedy duo Penn & Teller. An excerpt posted on the site (fallacyfiles.org) reveals a scene in which Penn is speaking with a spirit board collector who references “thousands of years” of related paranormal activity to which the collector concludes that if such knowledge is true then, “surely a spirit board can work”; Penn replies “So then if those aren’t true, a spirit board can’t work? Cool!” (Penn & Teller, Ouija Boards/Near Death Experiences, B.S.!). Another clear example of a fallacy or mistake was one taken from Tom Cruise, who had suggested that the Nazi’s had originally named methadone after Adolf Hitler. On the other end of the spectrum, we have an excerpt from The American Prospect (Nicholas Confessore, 1999) where the posted paragraph offers an anecdotal account of a presidential endorsement display inside Madison Square Garden which donned a few athletes and various other celebrity figures. The other went on to express his suggestive disdain for the endorsement suggesting that “If we pick our presidents in much the same way that we pick our underwear, then Michael Jordan's preference for Bill Bradley is precisely as relevant as his preference for Hanes.” I may be branding myself an offender here, but I am under the impression that the fallacy is with society and not Confessores’ reasoning, because I agree with him close to one-hundred percent that irrational factors such as celebrity has and continues to dictate the logical decisions of the masses where it ought not be. One could argue the election of Ronald Reagan was not, however, the election of Schwarzenegger well could have been. Lest we forget, what is a celebrity really? Well, let’s take a look:
-Famous/well-known
-Value of the individual as a person in the eye of their adoring public typically exaggerated.
One could argue that George W. Bush won his 2000 campaign due in large part to his “endorsement” by the Christian savior Jesus. Any political expert will tell you that without his declared faith and his spearheaded endorsement by the Southern Baptist Church who influenced all other fundamentalist branches he was nothing more than a sure-fire runner-up! To such like-minded people it is an endorsement from “the lord”.
-Jeremy Watkins (M.G.)