Thinking Critically Pt 2
Back in March I wrote about a helpful series of TechNYou videos that outlined how to think critically when making arguments. I recently came across another resource in that same vein that outlines all the various types of logical fallacies in one handy and convenient place. YourLogicalFallacyis.com is great because it lets you refer to the various types of fallacies quickly and easily. You can even download a poster of the site’s content as a PDF, print it and hang it on your wall as an ode to logic.
These resources have been invaluable to me as I try to wade my way through discriminatory arguments filled with logical fallacies concerning North Carolina’s upcoming vote on Amendment 1. Next Tuesday, May 8th, NC voters will decide if the state has the ability to seriously curtail the civil rights of same-sex couples in what is unfortunately promising to be a close decision. If approved, the constitutional provision would read:
“Marriage between one man and one woman is the only domestic legal union that shall be valid or recognized in this State.”
The proposed Amendment is unnecessary since NC law already doesn’t recognize same-sex marriage as such, but right-wing Christian conservatives felt it wasn’t enough and proposed stronger wording in the form of Amendment 1. If passed, these couples would be barred from the same legal rights that heterosexual couples currently enjoy like health care benefits, end of life decisions and more. The President opposes the measure, and so do I.
Local writer and blogger, Ed Cone has been a strong opponent of Amendment 1 since it first came on the scene and his blog has been a great place for NC natives to discuss and debate the issues at hand. It’s also been the political equivalent of a petri dish for logical fallacies like straw man arguments, slippery slopes and unfortunately ad hominem attacks. As I transition from a young man to a more seasoned one, I find resources like YourLogicalFallacyis.com invaluable to help me keep my cool and make calm, rational arguments. Check it out and always remember to fight the good fight.
Your readers (and you!) might also be interested in this site/chart on what the author calls “Rhetological fallacies”, defined as “errors and manipulations of rhetoric and logical thinking”, here:
(As a nitpicky instructor of Informal Logic, I feel obligated to say that the chart is beautiful and cool, but that not everything listed on it as a fallacy is always fallacious. On the other hand, it’s a great reference and probably something that I should have tattooed on my hand, to help myself.)
Comments are closed.