In chapter 11, the book shifts towards the topic of refutation by fallacy claims, which means when you state someone’s claim is factually wrong. All fallacies talked about in this chapter are important and seen in every argument. I think I witness a fallacy in the arguments I have daily with teammates about sports. After every claim made, someone tries to refute the argument because of false statements made, then the counterclaims tend to find its way into each and every argument. I think the counterclaims are the most important part in this section because it allows you to correct your fallacy in continue to strengthen your argument for your decision makers. In all honesty, rebuttals in general strengthens any argument because it makes you think your argument through. In addition to that, a counterclaim to a fallacy in an argument just strengthens it even more with correcting your fallacy with a new and improved claim with the right facts.
There were a couple of terms I found in this chapter that I wish were explained a little more. First, the concept of uncritical responses to refutation is only covered briefly. I think that this is one of the most fundamental barriers to effective public argumentation in the United States right now. I find this issue most concerning for the liberal party. Recalling the last election and the concept of 'incremental' argumentation, I feel that people demonstrated a massive failure of critical thinking by voting for third parties or not voting. People who were disappointed with Hillary Clinton's candidacy in place of Bernie Sanders decided to either continue voting for Bernie or not vote altogether. Neither of these strategies amounted to effective support of their cause, and they constitute the uncritical "knee-jerk" reaction described in this chapter. In this case, uncritical response to opposition worked directly against the interests of the decision-makers. A...
Comments
Post a Comment