Hey what’s up Thinkers! Kathy Gibbens here…
We are back today with a new fallacy, but first, let’s do a quick review of a fallacy we covered earlier in the podcast. Let’s review the Whole-to-Part Fallacy. And just know that a lot of fallacies have several different names…it can get a little confusing sometimes, lol, but this fallacy is also sometimes called A Fallacy of Composition. It’s helpful to know the names, but really, the most important thing is to be able to recognize a fallacy when you hear it and to know what’s wrong with the thinking.
The Whole-to-Part Fallacy happens when someone concludes that b/c a group of people or things has a certain characteristic, then therefore the individuals that make up the group must also have the same characteristics.
Question to ask yourself when faced with a Whole -to-Part Fallacy is this: “Is it really correct to assume that this person or thing has a characteristic just b/c they’re a part of that particular group?”
If you want to hear more about this fallacy, go back & check out Episode 36.
I have had a really cool experience this week. As you know, our family homeschools with Classical Conversations, who are also sponsors of this podcast! This week, we have done a takeover of their Instagram page and each day, we’ve been sharing the behind-the-scenes of what homeschooling looks like in our family. If you’re curious, definitely go check it out! Now, stories only last for 24 hours on IG, as I’m sure you know, but we will be saving them in a highlight, so you should be able to find it there. If you’re curious about homeschooling, we’ve got 2 free e-books for you! Fill out the form at www.classicalconversations.com/gibbens and you can download them right away, and you can also get more info about the programs that CC offers!
Alright, let’s dive into today’s new fallacy: The Appeal to Ridicule. Now, there are a bunch of other “Appeal” fallacies…several of which we’ve covered here on the podcast already. You can go back and check those out. So the Appeal to Ridicule happens when someone substitutes ridicule or mockery for evidence when they’re making an argument. Basically, they just mock a claim or an idea or an argument rather than giving a real reason why the argument isn’t valid rather than actually explaining why the argument isn’t valid. This fallacy is also sometimes called the appeal to mockery, ad absurdo, or the horse laugh fallacy. No joke.
Here’s a super simple example. “The sky is blue? Ha! That’s the most ridiculous thing I’ve ever heard!” Ok, so you can easily see the fallacy here. Just b/c I mocked the statement ‘the sky is blue’ doesn’t mean that it isn’t true!
Here’s another example that I found when I was researching this fallacy: “It takes faith to believe in God just like it takes faith to believe in the Easter Bunny -- but at least the Easter Bunny is based on a creature that actually exists!” Can you see the fallacy here? They’re using the Easter Bunny to say that God doesn’t exist, but they’re really just mocking the idea b/c everyone knows the Easter Bunny isn’t real. What AREN’T they doing? Actually making a real argument against the existence of God. They’re just making fun of the idea by making it seem stupid.
The problem with this fallacy is really simple and probably pretty obvious to you: mocking a claim doesn’t prove that it’s false! And usually, the person doing the mocking is also misrepresenting the original claim or idea in their mocking, so it’s a double-whammy. Not only are they NOT giving a good counter-argument, but they’re also misrepresenting the original claim. Double proof of bad thinking! And honestly, the Appeal to Ridicule is usually a sign of desperation on the part of the person using it. If someone does it, it’s probably b/c they have nothing else to say and no better argument to make!
Now, the danger with the Appeal to Ridicule is that it’s often very effective. Unfortunately, even unfounded mockery often works to make other people ridicule the idea or claim as well…and the reason is simple and it’s sort of hard-wired into our brains: we don’t want to be ridiculed as well. It’s almost like our brain thinks, “Oh no, if I believe that, I’ll be mocked & ridiculed, too, and I don’t want that!” That’s why this fallacy works so well to silence people and keep them from also expressing their ideas, beliefs or opinions…they don’t want to get ridiculed like the other person got ridiculed.
As I was coming up with a real-world example of this fallacy, I realized that I had way more examples than I can even share here, lol! This fallacy is used ALL THE TIME! Think about it: in politics, so often one opponent will say something like: “My opponent thinks the border is secure! What nonsense!” Ok, it may be nonsense, but if that comment isn’t followed up by a real reason or proof that it’s nonsense, it’s just an appeal to ridicule.
If you think you’re facing an Appeal to Ridicule, the question to ask yourself is this: “Does the fact that they’re being ridiculed make them wrong?” or “Does the fact that they’re being ridiculed mean it’s false?” *repeat*
Remember: When you learn HOW to think, you will no longer fall prey to those who are trying to tell you what THEY want you to think and it all starts with asking one simple question: “Is that really true?”
