Hey what’s up Thinkers! Kathy Gibbens here
Let’s start off with a quick review of a fallacy we covered earlier this season, Glittering Generalities. And, I encourage you to hit pause real quick and test yourself to see if you can remember the definition of Glittering Generalities! Glittering Generalities is a type of logical fallacy that occurs when someone uses vague and emotionally charged language to make a claim, without providing any concrete evidence or reasoning to support it. The idea is to appeal to people's feelings and values, rather than their logic and reasoning. This phrase is used to describe any set of ideas or principles that are appealing but nonspecific. The Glittering Generalities fallacy is actually categorized as a form of Propaganda and is sometimes also called Glowing Generalities.
The question to ask yourself when you’re facing a Glittering Generality is this: “Are there actually any merits to back up their claims?”
If you want to review or hear more about this fallacy, go back & check out Episode 98.
Are you looking for a good math curriculum for your student? With CTCMath, all of your kids from K–12 can learn at their own pace with one online family subscription. You have access to all grades and lessons, which means your children can work at whatever level is best for them. Whether your kid needs to catch up, keep up, or move ahead, with CTCMath they can finally understand math and work at their own pace. Answers are entered into the CTCMath automated grading system, and if they’re not sure WHY their answer is wrong, they can print off fully-worked solutions that show every step which should be taken to reach the correct answer, ensuring your child really understands the math concepts. Get all the details & even start a free trial at ctcmath.com. That’s C-T-C Math.com. And, for homeschoolers, right now you can sign up for 50% off by using the link in the show notes!
Alright, let’s dive into today’s new fallacy, the Ipse Dixit Fallacy. And, yes, that's a Latin phrase, and it means “He, himself, said it.” So, an Ipse Dixit Fallacy happens when someone makes an argument and doesn’t give any other evidence to back up his argument but claims it’s true because he says it’s true. Or, they argue that their claim is true because “That’s just the way it is”. It’s technically an Appeal to Authority, with themself as the authority. The way I would describe it is that it’s an Appeal to Self.
Whether we realize it or not, as parents, we sometimes commit a form of this fallacy when we answer questions with, “Because I said so” rather than giving an actual explanation. Now, are there cases where the explanation is above the child’s head and ability to understand and we just need them to do what we’re asking them? Sure, of course there are. But, just saying “Because I said so” is an example of the Ipse Dixit fallacy.
Or, here’s another example, Becky tells her younger sister, “There are little flower worms in the dirt that only come out in the spring and when they die, they sprout into the flowers that we see after it rains.” Her sister says, “Is that really where flowers come from?” To which Becky replies, “Trust me, that’s how it works!” In this case, she’s making a bold claim, which is obviously false, and when her claim is questioned, she replies with ‘trust me’, which is basically saying, I’m the expert, believe me, rather than actually providing evidence to back up her claim.
The problem behind the Ipse Dixit Fallacy is pretty simple: They’re not addressing the argument or bringing evidence to back up the claim they’re making. You can’t just say something and then say it’s true because you said it. You have to bring the receipts! You have to have real evidence as to why what you’re saying is true. It’s a method of avoiding the argument and hoping you can get the other person to avoid the argument as well.
A version of this fallacy that happened in the last few years is a few statements that Dr. Anthony Fauci made during the height of the pandemic arguments. Dr. Fauci was trying to get the American people to follow the guidelines he and the CDC were recommending and was trying to speak out against the people who weren’t following them or who were saying they were wrong and dangerous. Here’s what he said in one statement, and I know that you’re not getting the full context of the conversation here, I’m just taking one part of what he said…feel free to search online and you can hear his whole statement, but here’s part of what he said: “A lot of what you are seeing as attacks on me quite frankly, are attacks on science because all the things I have spoken about from the very beginning have been fundamentally based on science” and another time he said, “I represent science.” So essentially he’s appealing to himself as the reason why people should listen to him rather than giving evidence.
Question to ask yourself: “Do they have any other evidence than just themself?” *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?”
