Accused of a fallacy? Suspect a fallacy? Ask Dr. Bo and the community!

Quickly register to comment, ask and respond to questions, and get FREE access to our passive online course on cognitive biases!
Register!

one moment please...


Welcome! This is the place to ask the community of experts and other fallacyophites (I made up that word) if someone has a committed a fallacy or not. This is a great way to settle a dispute! This is also the home of the "Mastering Logical Fallacies" student support.


Dr. Bo's Criteria for Logical Fallacies:

  1. It must be an error in reasoning not a factual error.
  2. It must be commonly applied to an argument either in the form of the argument or in the interpretation of the argument.
  3. It must be deceptive in that it often fools the average adult.

Therefore, we will define a logical fallacy as a concept within argumentation that commonly leads to an error in reasoning due to the deceptive nature of its presentation. Logical fallacies can comprise fallacious arguments that contain one or more non-factual errors in their form or deceptive arguments that often lead to fallacious reasoning in their evaluation.

Contact Form



Send me a copy of this message
Send Message sending message...

Q&A Home Question

0

votes

image loading...
Mohamed Gadelrab

Eager Newbie

image loading...

Mohamed Gadelrab


Eager Newbie

About Mohamed Gadelrab

Sorry, this user has not created a bio yet.
evidence
Mon, Nov 19, 2018 - 11:49 PM

Is there a fallacy for trivializing evidence?

Hello,
Is there a fallacy for considering empirical evidence trivial or not substantial?
lets say this for example:

person 1:"Tomatoes are red"
person 2: "Tomatoes are blue"
person 1: "Well we all see them red with our eyes, and there are certain chemicals inside tomatoes like lycopene and carotene that make them red"
person 2: "They are not red until you prove them to be so!"

Person 2 ignored the strong evidence provided by Person 1. Is there a fallacy for this?
Thanks.



Quick Comment On This Question (no login required):
Your comment below will be anonymously sent to the question owner, it will not be posted, and you will not get a response.

Send Comment sending comment...

2 Answers

0

votes

image loading...
Abdulazeez Alabbasi

Seasoned Vet

image loading...

Abdulazeez Alabbasi


Seasoned Vet

About Abdulazeez Alabbasi

Sorry, this user has not created a bio yet.
Print Tue, Nov 20, 2018 - 07:20 AM
Well denying evidence and asserting a counterclaim blindly are examples of flawed reasoning (or lack of reasoning probably), but to my knowledge there isn't a fallacy to describe that. It's simply denying evidence or acting like you haven't provided evidence in your tomatoes example. That, however, could be motivated by certain cognitive biases like the confirmation bias.


Quick Comment On This Answer (no login required):
Your comment below will be anonymously sent to the answer owner, it will not be posted, and you will not get a response.

Send Comment sending comment...

0

votes

image loading...
Michael Chase Walker
Screenwriter, producer, mythoclast

Seasoned Vet

image loading...

Michael Chase Walker

Screenwriter, producer, mythoclast

Seasoned Vet

About Michael Chase Walker

Michael Chase Walker is an actor, author, screenwriter, producer, and a former adjunct lecturer for the College of Santa Fe Moving Images Department, and Dreamworks Animation. His first motion picture was the animated classic, The Last Unicorn.
Michael was an in-house television writer for the hit television series: He-Man, She-Ra, Voltron, and V, the Series. In 1985, he was appointed Director of Children's programs for CBS Entertainment where he conceived, shaped and supervised the entire 1985 Saturday Morning line-up: Wildfire, Pee Wee's Playhouse, Galaxy High School, Teen Wolf, and over 10
Print Tue, Nov 20, 2018 - 12:08 AM
Well, that's more of a cognitive bias than a fallacy, because they don't really argue from fallacious point of reasoning, but rather a stance of
'not knowing what they don't know'. (Dunning Kruger) I suppose it might be considered an Argumentum ad Ignorantium, but there's no valid argument here other than red/blue/blue red.

Even the claim, "Well we all see them red with our eyes, and there are certain chemicals inside tomatoes like lycopene and carotene that make them red" is an Appeal to Authority, but it can't really be considered evidence or logic without further citations, verification, or, at the very least, a strong analogy such as: Mammal blood is actually blue until oxygen is introduced whereupon it appears red.


Registered User Comments

Abdulazeez Alabbasi
Tuesday, November 20, 2018 - 07:25:44 AM
@Michael Chase Walker:
Even the claim, "Well we all see them red with our eyes, and there are certain chemicals inside tomatoes like lycopene and carotene that make them red" is an Appeal to Authority,
I don't think the statement you quoted qualifies as an appeal to authority, as its logical form is not that which is the same as the form of an appeal to authority.

login to reply
2 replies
0 votes
 
Reply To Comment
working...
 

Michael Chase Walker
Tuesday, November 20, 2018 - 01:53:31 PM
Yeah, it is a stretch, isn't it? But here the claimant is presenting themselves as an authority with a dubious set of facts. Perhaps an appeal to complexity or tradition would be a better fit? In any event person 1's response is : "Well, we all see them red with our eyes, and there are certain chemicals inside tomatoes like lycopene and carotene that make them red". Okay, but there are also heirloom and rainbow tomatoes that are actually blue, green, purple, yellow and a host of polychromatic varieties:

See: https://www.jackseeds.com/products/rainbow-tomato-seeds100-seeds

login to reply
 
0 votes
 
Reply To Comment
working...
 

Abdulazeez Alabbasi
Tuesday, November 20, 2018 - 06:12:04 PM
@Michael Chase Walker: well, it doesn't appear to be an appeal to complexity or tradition either. If you want to break the statement down to its two claims, the first claim would be "well we all see them red with our eyes," which you could take to be an appeal to popularity or common belief, but I would see it as a legitimate appeal since the issue in question (color of tomatoes) is contingent on our sense perception, and since people with functional visual perception (color blind people aside) agree that tomatoes are red, that could be seen as a legitimate consensus rather than a fallacious appeal to popularity/common belief. The second claim "there are certain chemicals inside tomatoes like lycopene and carotene that make them red" is a valid scientific claim that can be validated. A quick search on carotene will demonstrate that it has an orange-red pigment, and lycopene in tomatoes is literally defined in a study as "the pigment principally responsible for the characteristic deep-red color of ripe tomato fruits and tomato products." (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11192026) The fact that there are exceptional tomatoes of other colors is irrelevant and does not address the typical tomatoes in question.

login to reply
 
0 votes
 
Reply To Comment
working...



About Archieboy Holdings, LLC. Privacy Policy Other Books Written by Bo
 Website Software Copyright 2018, Archieboy Holdings, LLC.