Rules of Debate
Rea,
It was fun to watch the presidential debate with you last night. I was excited to see your budding interest in the people and processes that shape our world.
As you noticed, the people on stage weren’t really debating in the truest sense. A good debate aims to convince with facts and well-grounded reasons. But last night, we saw many speakers using what we call “logical fallacies” - mistakes in reasoning that might sound convincing at first but don’t actually prove their point.
Remember how we’ve listened to “Smash Boom Best” and their “State of Debate” program? They’ve taught us about some of these fallacies. Let’s look at a few and imagine how they might appear in an argument for having ice cream for dinner!
-
Ad Hominem: This is when you attack the person instead of their argument. For example, “Abba, you’re no fun. If you were fun, you’d let us have ice cream for dinner.”
-
Bandwagon Effect: This is when you argue that something is good because everyone else is doing it. Like, “All my friends have ice cream for dinner every night!”
-
Slippery Slope: This is when you claim that one small step will lead to a chain of events ending in disaster. I might say, “If we have ice cream for dinner tonight, soon we’ll be having it for breakfast and lunch too!”
-
Strawman Fallacy: This is when you misrepresent someone’s argument to make it easier to attack. For instance, if I said, “So, you want us to never eat healthy food again?” when all you suggested was ice cream for dinner sometimes.
Now, here’s something to think about: can you remember any moments from last night’s debate where the speakers might have used these fallacies? Maybe someone attacked another person’s character instead of their ideas, or claimed that a small policy change would lead to huge disasters?
Remember, recognizing these fallacies can help you make better arguments. It’s like having a toolbox for your mind. So, next time you’re watching a debate, see if you can spot these fallacies. And when you’re making your own arguments, focus on solid, logical reasoning instead.
What do you think? Can you come up with a fallacy-free argument for ice cream for dinner? Or better yet, can you remember a specific example of a fallacy from last night’s debate?
Love, Abba
