A few people that I’ve come into contact with have expressed displeasure with my highlighting of logical fallacies. One guy claimed to be a scientist and tried to posit that he’s fine to use logical fallacies if he’s doing what he calls “science.” Another person didn’t like my use of logical fallacies to criticise his statements about the seven laws and “the Torah.” It’s almost like he was saying that it’s fine to use logical fallacies if he’s giving a “Torah” opinion. Or maybe that, since it’s presumed to be a “Torah” opinion, then it can’t be a logical fallacy. I don’t really know. I keep putting the word “Torah” in quotation marks because sometimes I’m not sure what is being referred to by the word, “Torah.”
Either way, the challenge to me is this: why highlight logical fallacies? What’s the point? Aren’t science and “Torah” exempt from being criticised for logical fallacies?
It has been made plain to me more and more that the Jewish tradition is neither my heritage nor my possession. By “possession,” I don’t simply mean I own a Jewish book or that I can access their literature on a website. I mean being able to justly come to my own conclusions, to use them for myself, my way. Whole volumes of Jewish Torah discussion and tradition are out of my reach because they may be unwritten, or they’re written but in Hebrew or Aramaic, or simply out of my reach. So when someone talks to me about some rabbi coming to some legal conclusion regarding the seven laws or about Gentile morality by means of the oral tradition, that normally means something out of my reach that I should accept as diktat. “Just trust the rabbi!” (And forget the saying of “two Jews, three opinions!” or that even rabbis can be wrong, like anyone else!)
For a Gentile who does not have easy access to another nation’s knowledge, I believe there must still be tools available for be to come closer to truth, to build a sturdy psychical structure and to judge claims that are thrown at me. When I was a christian, I didn’t have any access to foreign, inaccessible oral traditions to judge whether it was the right thing to accept Jesus as God or messiah. As a human experiencing the language of other humans through various media, I don’t have some “Jewish Torah” to help me navigate the various trends and messages and options. I don’t have some rabbi on speed-dial to let me know what to do, what to believe.
As I’ve said, I believe there is a tool accessible to all humans, not locked away with a really small tribe of people, and one of those tools is rationality, the use of reasoning in the quest for wisdom.
If they tell you there is wisdom among the gentile nations, believe them…If they tell you there is Torah among the gentile nations, do not believe them.
Eichah Rabbah 2:13
Torah, as the Jewish Bible and Talmud states, is the possession of Israel. But wisdom and justice (meaning the ability to discern and judge and to be fair) is accessible to all, no Jew needed at all.
Since reasoning is available to all, a tool for discernment and judging, it’s important to avoid failures in reasoning, namely, logical fallacies. What are logical fallacies?
“A logical fallacy is a false statement that weakens an argument by distorting an issue, drawing false conclusions, misusing evidence, or misusing language.”
(Dave Kemper et al., Fusion: Integrated Reading and Writing. Cengage, 2015)
Nordquist, R., (2019) “What is a logical fallacy?” Available at: https://www.thoughtco.com/what-is-logical-fallacy-1691259 [Accessed: 20 August 2021]
Bad reasoning can occur when the following happens.
Simply put, this means that when people reason badly they may err in one of three basic directions: they can make points that just don’t relate to the issue (irrelevancy); they can make assumptions that are not justified or necessary (presumption); or they can use language that confuses and muddies the argument (clarity). As you learn to evaluate arguments, you will soon be asking yourself questions like, “Is his point relevant? What does his argument presume? Is she being clear?”
Larson, A., Hodge, J. (2010) “The Art of Argument: An Introduction to the Informal Fallacies” Classical Academic Press. Camp Hill. pg 5.
A fallacy refers to a misleading, deceptive or false notion or belief, a misleading or unsound (not valid) argument or position.
If I’m supposed to avoid what is false and have a greater chance at finding and holding that which is true, then it’s vital that I not only avoid fallacies, logical fallacies, but that I recognise them, even if they are coming from a loved one, even if they are coming from a purported authority or expert. In fact, my love for the speaker and is expertise are irrelevant to the strength of his position.
I acknowledge that knowing logical fallacies does not render a conclusion or belief untrue. People can believe true things for stupid or nonsensical reasons. But one tool I have to help me test claims is to test the reasoning they are based on. If someone is trying to convince me of something, or trying to correct me about something, then testing their reasoning can at least give me clues as to whether the argument is sound, valid and worthy of consideration. I can also see if they are trying to mislead me or muddy the waters which can teach me about the character of the person trying to argue a point.
This applies to anyone, be it a scientist, a philosopher, a boss, a politician, a “noahide,” a rabbi, my wife or my enemy.
So I will not apologise for my use of this tool, a tool that I can use for myself. And, until shown otherwise, I’ll continue to use it to help me judge the world and the gamut of opinions that are thrown at me each day.
Seven Laws Blog UK 
8 replies on “Why refer to logical fallacies?”
I don’t think you saw my comment in which I said that I have begun to love this blog, because it was a reply to a comment.
Anyway, I have a criticism of you using a car crash as an analogy for autism. I find that it’s inaccurate because autism is not a disease and in some aspects not even a disability.
Also, again thank you for your immense body of posts about the seven laws, may Hashem bless you.
Check your comment again about your positive feelings about this blog. I replied.
The point about my analogy is not about whether autism is a disease or disability. It’s about using a condition that refers to a wide range of effects in order to take one person’s experience and act as if it applies to you as well only because of the use of that wide-ranging label.
Ok now I understand the intent of the analogy.
You cited Midrash on Lamentations. Many statements in the Midrash are metaphorical and are not meant to be taken literally.
It is dangerous to rely upon the rough seas of human whims and crafty rationalizations.
I checked how that specific Midrash is used by Jews before I used it myself. Use evidence to show how I misused it. Simply saying that many statements are metaphorical when not all statement are metaphorical says nothing useful the specific one I cited which, again, I checked before using.
Logical fallacies are not human whim. Whims as sudden, passing and fanciful ideas. That doesn’t describe logical fallacies at all that are as old and lasting as critical reasoning and proper judgement.
Knowledge of logical fallacies is one tool that can help a person recognise “crafty rationalisations.” If you’re equating the logical fallacies with “craftiness,” which refers to deceit and crookedness, then you never provide evidence that they are deceitful. So I have no reason to see your criticism as worthwhile.
What makes your criticism self-defeating is that you’ve use that tool of logical fallacies yourself. I was reading in one of your older comments how you were complaining that I was strawmanning you. You referred to the fallacy of strawman argument.
So your attempt at a warning falls totally flat since it lacks relevant and substantive evidence, it makes use of words to label logical fallacies that have a totally irrelevant meanings to what they are, and you condemn a tool that you yourself use.
What do you think of the existence of [extraterestrial] aliens? Recently there was the set of US declassified UFO-related audio, and that video in which that “tic-tac”-shaped UFO appeared that was very, very far beyond our current technology.
I don’t think much of extraterrestrials at all. I don’t know the extents of “our” current technology, so I wouldn’t put any weight about claims of technology beyond that of human beings; I don’t know the limits of technology for people I don’t know, especially secretive technology groups.
The term “UFO” is difficult to attach to a positive claim of extraterrestrials exactly because of the meaning of the acronym: UNIDENTIFIED flying object. If it’s unidentified, then you can’t say much positively about the flying object or its occupants. Heliocentric believers, those who believe in the natural-law-defying “vacuum of outer space,” can’t even call it a space-ship because it’s normally observed from the ground, so it can’t be determined where it came from.
To focus on the term “extraterrestrial,” since I hold views that are called “flat earth,” and the term relies on a view that earth is a flying spinning ball called a planet hence the unknown beings are claimed to from other flying spinning balls, other planets, balls said to exist in place that defies natural law, the vacuum of outer space, then I don’t believe physical things exist in fictional places. Therefore, for me, unknown beings from such a location cannot exist.
Now, since I don’t know the limits of the flat earth, and I don’t know about the below the earth nor do I know about what is in the inaccessible places in the sea due to depth, it’s possible that unknown creatures can exist there. But the fact is that I don’t really have much experience of the vast majority of the realm in which we live other than what I see around me, other than the stories of strangers. But the possibility of such unknown physical entities is both utterly irrelevant to me and unfounded for me as well. Right now, whether they exist or not, I have no real reason to care.
That’s not meant to sound harsh. It’s just the blunt fact of the matter. It’s a bit like stories of ghosts. I’ve never experienced such things. I don’t think people know what they are even if they exist. Whether someone else has experienced such unknown means nothing to me. I don’t discount or accept it. It’s just a story and then I get on with life.
I agree that it is mostly irrelevant.