Posts Tagged “argumentum ad nauseam”

Antonin Scalia 2010By now most of my regular readers have heard about Antonin Scalia’s New York Magazine interview. The main news out of it has been that Scalia believes Satan is a “real person.” I hadn’t commented on it, since I don’t find it very remarkable that a famous Christianist believes the Devil is real. I mean, seriously … that’s news to anyone? Come on! I initially regarded that interview as a “water is wet” or “sky is blue” story, unworthy of attention.

With that said, I recently noticed something he said which, after consideration, I find noteworthy. At least, I think the significance of it needs to be pointed out, if for no other reason than that to show that almost anyone can fall into illogic, if s/he isn’t careful — and that large amounts of irrationality and illogic can be expressed within one short statement.

The important part comes in page 4 of the article (WebCite cached version):

[Interviewer Jennifer Senior:] Isn’t it terribly frightening to believe in the Devil?

[Justice Antonin Scalia:] You’re looking at me as though I’m weird. My God! Are you so out of touch with most of America, most of which believes in the Devil? I mean, Jesus Christ believed in the Devil! It’s in the Gospels! You travel in circles that are so, so removed from mainstream America that you are appalled that anybody would believe in the Devil! Most of mankind has believed in the Devil, for all of history. Many more intelligent people than you or me have believed in the Devil.

First, note the sanctimony of Scalia’s response. Sanctimony is the religionist’s stock-in-trade. How dare Ms Senior question belief in the Devil? Scalia’s outrage is palpable. But it also doesn’t mean anything — to anyone.

Next, Scalia cites as evidence of Satan’s existence, that “most of [America] believes in the Devil.” This is a fallacy known formally as argumentum ad populum, and by other names, such as appeal to consensus, the bandwagon fallacy, appeal to popularity, the democratic fallacy, appeal to the masses, etc. The error here should be obvious and summed up in this short statement: Veracity is not up for a vote. People — even many of them! — can be, and often are, very wrong sometimes. Just because something is widely believed, doesn’t make it true. For most of history, nearly all of humanity was utterly convinced the earth was at the center of the universe, with the sun, moon, planets and stars all revolving around it. It turns out, that’s not true at all!

Another piece of evidence Scalia cites as proof that Satan is a real person, is that ‘Jesus Christ believed in the Devil.” Sorry, but this isn’t going to fly, because the reports we have of what Jesus did and didn’t believe come only from the gospels, which Scalia also cites, themselves, as evidence of Satan’s existence. The problem there, of course, is that this just means some late-first-century Christians who wrote those books, believed in the Devil. It’s not actually objective or verifiable evidence of Satan’s existence as “a real person.”

Third, Scalia lambastes his interviewer for being “so removed from mainstream America that” she’d dare imply belief in the Devil as “a real person” is a bad thing. This is his attempt to discredit his interviewer by saying she’s an elitist; and this, too, has been a common Religious Right tactic. Folks on the Right love to rage and fume about “the Elite” (aka “the Bicoastal Elite,” the “Mass Media Elite,” etc.) and how horrible they are for being insolent enough not to think, act and talk in ways unlike all the folks they call “normal Americans” (aka Flyover Country, the Deep South, the Bible Belt, etc.). The cold fact is that Justice Scalia is, himself, a bona fide card-carrying member of the country’s “elite:” He’s university-educated; a professional, no less (i.e. a lawyer and judge); and he’s one of just 9 people who comprise one of the most powerful bodies in the US. Scalia is one of the last people who ought ever to accuse anyone else of being out of touch with America!

After these little tidbits of illogic and irrationality, Scalia swerves back to the old argumentum ad populum, citing the beliefs of “most of mankind” and of people “more intelligent than” himself or his interviewer, as evidence of Satan’s existence as “a real person.” Unfortunately, as I’ve already explained, this is fallacious. What’s more, for Scalia to repeat a fallacy, in the (obvious) hope it will reinforce what he’s saying, is itself a fallacy, called argumentum ad nauseam, or argument by repetition. Saying something that’s not true more than once, can never make it suddenly, magically become true. Nonetheless, fierce religionists like Scalia love to think the universe works that way. They repeat tired old canards like, “Evolution is ‘just’ a theory,” and “It takes more faith to be an atheist than a believer,” and so on. They truly think that repeating these things without cessation will make them so. But it can never work, any more than saying “2 + 2 = 5” endlessly can never make that equation mathematically valid. It just can’t.

Once again, Justice Scalia has provided me with evidence that anyone, at any time, can engage in fallacious thinking, and probably not even be aware of it. It’s something we must all be on guard against, at all times.

Photo credit: Wikimedia Commons.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , ,

Comments Comments Off on Supreme Court Justice Loves Illogic And Fallacy

Mike HuckabeeThis is a tired, old argument that religionists often make against gay marriage. So perhaps it’s not really news, when a religionist like Mike Huckabee, failed presidential hopeful and former governor of Arkansas, declared that gay marriage is the equivalent of incest. But MSNBC reports on his idiotic, illogical, and irrational remarks (WebCite cached article):

Mike Huckabee, a possible Republican presidential candidate in 2012, says the effort to allow gays and lesbians to marry is comparable to legalizing incest, polygamy and drug use.

Huckabee also told college journalists last week that gay couples should not be permitted to adopt. “Children are not puppies,” he said.

Huckabee visited The College of New Jersey in Ewing, N.J., last Wednesday to speak to the Student Government Association. He also was interviewed by a campus news magazine, The Perspective, which published an article on Friday.

Huckabee is falling for the fallacy of the slippery slope. The fallacy here is an obvious one: Legalizing gay marriage does not also force society to legalize other things which are — currently — criminal. And that, of course, is the salient point here. Right now — even if gay marriage were not permitted anywhere in the country — it is still fully legal for two adults to be engaged in gay relationship, if they wish to be. (The last remaining sodomy laws in the US were struck down by the 2003 Lawrence v. Texas case.) Legalizing gay marriage merely extends an added right to people who are already doing something which is legally permissible. Legalizing incestuous marriages is therefore not an equivalent, because incest is illegal in the first place!

But the ferocious religionist Shucksabee doesn’t stop there. Oh no. He blathers on like a buffoon, revealing his raging ignorance with every syllable he utters:

Huckabee told the interviewer that not every group’s interests deserve to be accommodated, if their lifestyle is outside of what he called “the ideal.”

It’s interesting he’d bring up the notion of “ideals.” I could be wrong, but I think it would be “ideal” if Christians who ostensibly are against divorce, stopped divorcing. But the truth is that they do get divorced. According to the Barna Group, they get divorced at a higher rate than most others, and at a much higher rate than non-believers. See this page at Religious Tolerance (cached) and this page at Adherents.Com (cached) for more details on these statistics. And it’s Shucksabee’s own denomination — i.e. Baptists — who at one point had led the nation in divorce!

So let’s talk about marriage, and especially “ideals.” Definitely! Huck, let’s also talk about how your own fellow Christians, particularly Baptists, refuse to live up to the ideals of their own religion. We should talk about that … and we should mention that there’s a word for people who complain about other groups not living up to “ideals,” while one’s own cohorts simultaneously refuse to live up to them: That word, former governor, is hypocrisy.

Yes, hypocrisy. You may remember that word from your Bible, Huck, specifically the parts of it where the founder of your own religion ordered you and all the rest of his followers never to engage in hypocrisy. Jesus’ orders on that issue were clear and unambiguous.

I suggest you obey them, and stop being a flaming hypocrite. Try it sometime. Just once. OK? It won’t hurt you, Huck, I promise.

P.S. Huckabee’s use of an old but fallacious argument, is itself a fallacy, called argumentum ad nauseam. Repeating a demonstrably false claim — in this case, that gay marriage is the equivalent of incest — does not magically make it come true if it’s repeated often enough. All it does is make those who continue to spew it, look like the juvenile morons they actually are.

Photo credit: Jonathan D. Blundell.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Comments Comments Off on Huckabee: Gay Marriage Equals Incest