Robert Allen & Lorne Greene: The Propaganda Game
[Excerpts]
Based on the book Straighter Thinking
by George H. Moulds Published in 1966 by AIM (Autelic Instructional Materials)
Publishers, New Haven, CT
Contents
I. Introduction
II. Instructions [Not included here]
III. Explanations of Techniques
A. Techniques of Self-Deception
- Prejudice
- Academic Detachment
- Drawing the Line
- Not Drawing the Line
- Conservatism, Radicalism, Moderatism
- Rationalization
- Wishful Thinking
- Tabloid Thinking
- Causal Oversimplification
- Inconceivability
B. Techniques of Language
- Emotional Terms
- Metaphor & Simile
- Emphasis
- Quotation Out of Context
- Abstract Terms
- Vagueness
- Ambiguity
- Shift of Meaning
C. Techniques of Irrelevance
- Appearance
- Manner
- Degrees & Titles
- Numbers
- Status
- Repetition
- Slogans
- Technical Jargon
- Sophistical Formula
D. Techniques of Exploitation
- Appeal to Pity
- Appeal to Flattery
- Appeal to Ridicule
- Appeal to Prestige
- Appeal to Prejudice
- Bargain Appeal
- Folksy Appeal
- Join the Bandwagon Appeal
- Appeal to Practical Consequences
- Passing from the Acceptable to the Dubious
E. Techniques of Form
- Concurrency
- Post Hoc
- Selected Instances
- Hasty Generalization
- Faulty Analog
- Composition
- Division
- Non Sequitur
F. Techniques of Maneuver
- Diversion
- Disproving a Minor Point
- Ad Hominem
- Appeal to Ignorance
- Leading Question
- Complex Question
- Inconsequent Argument
- Attacking a Straw Man
- Victory by Definition
- Begging the Question
IV. The Experts Game [Not included here]
V. Summary
VI. Suggested Answers [Not included here]
VII. Appendix [Not included here]
I. Introduction
Propaganda is a subject of great
concern in our society today, perhaps more so than in any other society
in history. With the advent of television as a complement to the other
communications media now available to us, the opportunities to use propaganda
in disseminating information, expounding ideas, and offering opinions have
increased considerably. And, unfortunately, it is far too often the case
that propaganda is used to make us accept questionable points-of-view,
to make us vote for men who may be unfit for public office, and make us
buy products which are useless and sometimes even dangerous. Therefore,
propaganda, or the method of influencing people to believe certain ideas
and to follow certain courses of action, is of special importance to each
of us.
The word "propaganda" comes from
the Latin phrase "Congregatio de Propaganda Fide", or "Congregation for
the Propagation of the Faith", a committee formed early in the Roman Catholic
Church, whose function it is to aid the propagation or spread of the church
doctrine throughout the world. Propaganda plays a dynamic, positive role
in the daily lives of many men. Actors, preachers, teachers, politicians,
editors, advertisers, salesmen, reformers, authors, parents --- our friends
and even ourselves --- practice the art of persuasion. And each of us,
as we attempt to put our ideas across to others, to persuade them to agree
with our way of thinking, is, in a sense, acting in the ancient Roman tradition
of the word: we are all missionaries for our causes.
Propaganda, as we know it today,
can be nefarious as well as a noble art. For at one moment its techniques
can be used to whip up racial hatred among groups of people; at another
moment, its methods can be employed to move persons to acts of warmth and
kindness. It is important, therefore, that we consider a person’s motive
for using a propaganda technique, as well as understanding that a technique
has been used.
Often, the ideas of facts that we
wish to convey are linked with words about which everyone has some emotional
feeling --- words such as "mother", "home", "beauty", "love", or "cruelty",
"murder" or "death" --- since both hostile and loving emotions are a part
of us all. But just as there is a place for emotional feeling in men, so
also there is a place for more dispassionate thinking. In a democratic
society, it is the role for every citizen to make decisions after evaluating
many ideas. It is especially important then that a citizen be able to think
clearly about the ideas that are daily presented to him. It is imperative
that he be able to analyze and distinguish between the emotional aura surrounding
the ideas, and the actual content of the idea. To this goal of clear thinking
the game of PROPAGANDA addresses itself.
PROPAGANDA has been designed to introduce
the players to some of the techniques used to distort the thinking process.
However, one should not be deceived into thinking that familiarity with
the subject matter in this game qualifies him as an expert thinker. PROPAGANDA
should be regarded as an introduction to, rather than a completed course
in, clear thinking.
A number of cautions need to be observed
as one gains a better understanding of propaganda techniques. Many times
defects in argument occur innocently. This is particularly true in discussions
involving families, associates, and/or close friends. Although it is hoped
that your awareness of the principles and practices of propaganda will
be employed in your everyday approach to problem analysis, it is recommended
that in you "go slow" in correcting others. No one likes to be branded
publicly as an illogical fool. Also, just because a labeled technique can
be attached to an argument, that argument is not necessarily invalid. Finally,
it is not the aim of the authors that the PROPAGANDA GAME encourage youngsters
and adults to become cynical and unduly suspicious of everything that is
said and written, but rather that they become aware of the emotional overtones
in all arguments and suggestions, and thus gain more thoughtful control
over their responses to the multitude of ideas that they encounter daily...
II. Instructions [Not included here]
III. Explanation of Techniques
Section A: Habits
of Reflective Procedure (Techniques of Self-Deception)
1. Prejudice
Example: Nathanael asked (referring
to Jesus): "Can anything good come out of Nazareth?", and thus indicated
his prejudice against Jesus’ hometown.
Meaning: A prejudice is an
unwillingness to examine fairly the evidence and reasoning in behalf of
the person or thing which is the object of the prejudice. It is a prejudgment
caused by indoctrination, conditioning, or some prior experience of a singularly
pleasant or unpleasant character. A prejudice has strong and deep emotional
support.
In discussing Prejudice here we are
not talking of appeals to known prejudices. These are made from
without, as by an advertising man, a salesman, or a politician. Rather,
our interest is in how your own Prejudice, unaided by outside support,
victimizes you.
Prejudice differs from hasty Generalization
in that although hasty Generalization often represents a spontaneous emotional
reaction, Prejudice is always a matter of much longer standing.
The feeling that operates in the latter case is deep, not superficial,
and is often completely hidden from the man in its grip.
2. Academic Detachment
Example: "I’ve heard many
arguments in favor of the Republican candidate and just as many for the
Democratic. Hence I don’t find any reason to prefer one over the other,
so I’m going to stay home and not vote for either one".
Meaning: We refuse to commit
ourselves when decision or action is demanded. In a situation requiring
a stand to be taken, we see (or think we see) persuasive arguments on both
sides. But certain situations (e.g., voting) require decision and action
of one kind or another. Here, instead of trying to remain neutral, we must
make a decision on the basis of which side seems to have the greater weight
of evidence.
3. Drawing the Line
Example: "Either you tell
the truth or you lie".
Meaning: Sharp distinctions
are drawn where it is inappropriate to draw sharp distinctions.
It is permissible to draw the line
between those who are for you and those who are not for you, those
who tell the truth and those who do not tell the truth, and so on.
But the error and inclination exhibited by common speech is to fail to
realize that the logical class of those who do not tell the truth includes
two
subclasses that are quite different: (1) those who lie and (2) those who
say nothing at all.
4. Not Drawing The Line
Example: "If we are allowed
to stay out till two o’clock in the morning, why not till three --- one
hour doesn’t make that much difference".
Meaning: The existence of
differences is denied just because the differences are small and therefore
apparently unimportant.
5. Conservatism, Radicalism, Moderatism
~
Example: (1) "This belief
is an old one, but I want you to know that the old ways are the best ways".
(2) "What we need is new ideas, completely
new ways of thinking; the old is not worthy of our acceptance".
(3) "Vote for me. My program is neither
conservative nor radical".
Meaning: These three habits
of mind are forms of prejudice. But they are not necessarily such. Prejudices
have histories with a beginning. But the neo-conservative, the one who
prefers what is old or familiar simply because it is old or familiar, may
be born such; it is part of the temperament he brings into the world. Radicalism
is the habit of preferring the new or the revolutionary just because of
its newness. The moderate habitually chooses middle-of-the-road or compromise
ground; he avoids the two extremes. But there is no inherent virtue in
moderatism or compromise as such. Actually, there are times when our position
should be conservative, and still other times when we should be moderate.
6. Rationalization
Example: The student, having
failed the test, blames his failure on the classroom’s being so hot that
he couldn’t think, whereas in reality he knows that he didn’t spend enough
time in study.
Meaning: You cite reasons
or causes that will justify action that really has less creditable grounds.
7. Wishful Thinking
Example: "My son will win
because he ought to win after all his long hard preparation".
Meaning: You believe a proposition
to be true because you want it to be true.
When we are forced to admit
that our wishes have not become reality, we may then seek comfort in rationalizing.
If, in the example cited above, the son does not win and the contest is
fair, the parent will feel the necessity of inventing some argument that
will excuse the son’s failure.
8. Tabloid Thinking
Example: "In college Basil
was taught all about evolution --- the apeman theory, you know".
Meaning: To think in tabloids
is to oversimplify a complex theory or set of circumstances. The tabloid
thinker prefers quick summaries and has the habit of "putting things in
a nutshell".
Tabloids concerning people are popular
because they offer a neat summary of the character of a prominent person.
"Marx? You don’t know who Marx was? Why, he was that philosopher who became
impatient and irritable in his old age". It is much easier to remember
Marx in this simple fashion than to remember him as a man of many interesting
and controversial facets of character and conviction. These human tabloids
are frequently emotional, but they are not mere Emotional Terms. To be
Tabloid Thinking there must be some indication that someone is trying to
sum up another’s character. All stereotypes ("barbers are talkative") are
tabloids because they present a certain trait or characteristic, which
is really superficial or trivial, as being the essential nature of a given
class.
9. Causal Oversimplification
Example: "If it were not for
the ammunition makers, we would never have wars".
Meaning: A complex event is
explained by references to only one or two probable causes whereas many
are responsible.
10. Inconceivability
Example: "Since Ballhead State
has never in its past history won the conference title, I just can’t picture
them winning it this year".
Meaning: You declare a proposition
to be false simply because you cannot conceive it actualized or possible
of realization.
Section B: Watch
Their Language --- And Yours Too (Techniques of Language)
1. Emotional Terms
Example: Participant in Argument:
"If you ignorant fools would only shut your traps a while and let me explain".
Meaning: An emotional term
is a word or phrase which, however much factual information it conveys
about an object, also expresses and/or arouses a feeling for or
against
that object. Translated into neutral language the emotionally-charged example
given above should read: "I don’t agree and if you’ll just give me a chance
to talk, I’ll show you why".
The authors believe that emotional
language is appropriate in non-controversial situations. For purposes of
the Propaganda game, patriotic celebrations, church services, poetry
and other literary forms, and whenever a person is expressing personal
feelings without attempting to persuade or convince others are considered
to be non-controversial situations.
2. Metaphor & Simile
Example: Metaphor --- "Napoleon
was like a fox".
Meaning: A metaphor
is a comparison implied but not definitely stated. In the case of simile
the comparison is explicitly stated by means of such words as "like" or
"as".
In controversial situations the employment
of metaphor or simile is to be avoided because such figures of speech are
apt to suggest likenesses not really intended or not actually present.
Napoleon was not actually a fox. He may have been like one, but if so,
was it with respect to shrewdness or thievery or both or neither?
3. Emphasis
Example: When "We should not
speak ill of our friends" is quoted, the original meaning changes if any
of the following underlined words is emphasized: "We should not
speak
ill of our friends". Emphasizing "we" suggests that we should not,
true, but others may.
Meaning: The technique of
emphasis occurs only when another speaker or writer is quoted and one or
more words emphasized so as to imply what would not otherwise be implied
and thus put into the mouth of the source, meanings he may not have wished
to convey.
Oral emphasis is usually secured
by means of pitch, tone, or volume of voice. Written emphasis is secured
by a variety of devices, such as italicizing and underlining. "Italics
mine" (or its equivalent) is the accepted way for a writer to indicate
that he is giving a stress to certain words that the original author had
perhaps no intention of stressing.
4. Quotation Out of Context
Example: Someone quotes the
Bible as saying that, "money is the root of all evil", but leave out the
preceding words, "the love of".
Meaning: Quotation out of
context is a propaganda technique wheb the effect of quoting a given statement
without its context is to distort the original meaning in context.
The context of a given statement
is not merely the words that precede and that follow but every accompanying
circumstance, whether it be time and place or gesture and facial expression.
5. Abstract Terms
Example: A speaker defines
"neurosis" as "a psychological term for a state of mind involving the nerves",
but when he is asked to identify or point to --- among a large number of
people --- a case of neurosis, he is at a loss to do so, showing that he
is unable to use the term to make any concrete distinctions.
Meaning: An abstract term
is a word or symbol which stands for the qualities (one or more) possessed
in common by a number of particular things, facts or events. The technique
of abstract terms occurs when an arguer employs a word for which he may
have meaning in the form of other words, but the arguer is unable to
identify the concrete facts to which to word supposedly refers.
6. Vagueness
Example: Someone says to me,
"Sit down on that stool", and I sit down on the thing he points to. His
meaning is not ambiguous; I understand what he is referring to. But I find
the term "stool" vague under the circumstances, and I protest, "But this
is not a stool, for it has a little back to it, and so it is a chair".
He may reply, "But there is really not enough back there to call it a ‘back’,
so I call it a ‘stool’".
Meaning: To call a word "vague"
is to say that marginal situations can and do arise where there is doubt
as to whether the word should or should not be used in describing those
particular situations. The technique of vagueness exists where there is
uncertainty as to the scope of the word.
7. Ambiguity
Example: Joe says, "Henry
likes pudding better than his wife". And one or more people hearing him
are left wondering whether Henry likes pudding better than he likes his
wife if Henry likes pudding more than his wife does.
Meaning: A word or phrase
is ambiguous if in the mind of a hearer or reader it has two or more quite
different meanings and the interpreter is uncertain as to which was really
meant. In argument such a situation would at all times be undesirable.
8. Shift of Meaning
Example: "The fellow who was
supposed to arbitrate decided in favor of a company and fined the union.
Now anyone who takes sides in a dispute is certainly not impartial. So
how can this fellow claim to be an impartial arbitrator?".
Meaning: In shift of meaning
a word appears explicitly or implicitly two or more times in an argument
but with different meanings.
In the example appearing above "impartial"
shifts meaning. In its first use it means "wholly refraining from judgment;
taking no stand on an issue". But in its second use it means "judging after
investigation but without previous bias". Obviously, the arbitrator’s being
impartial in the second sense does not necessitate his being so in the
first sense. The implied conclusion ("the arbitrator is not impartial")
is invalid.
Section C: How
Suggestible Are You? (Techniques of Irrelevance)
1. Appearance
Example: A floor wax nationally
advertised on television is shown in the commercial being applied to a
floor with the immediate result of a brilliant luster. The viewer does
not know that the floor has been buffed and polished for days, and then
dust coated just before the wax was applied in the commercial.
Meaning: The appearance of
a thing (or person) is made the basis of our acceptance or rejection without
any thought that this appearance may be a deceptive indicator of value.
2. Manner
Example: "He was such a well-behaved
man, so understanding, so sincerely helpful. He wanted to help us. I couldn’t
insult him. So I gave him our savings to invest. He seemed so trustworthy".
Meaning: A person’s manner
of behaving is made the basis of our acceptance or rejection of him without
any thought that this manner may be a deceptive indicator of value.
3. Degrees & Titles
Example: The name on the office
door reads "James A. Rydack, The. B, M. Th. R., As. D., Counselor Extraordinary
of the Society of Metaphysicians". A woman about to enter the office says
to her husband, "With all those degrees and that title, he must know his
stuff".
Meaning: We buy or we believe
out of respect for degrees or titles attached to the names of those who
persuade us.
4. Numbers
Example: From an advertisement:
"One million more sold this year than last".
Meaning: We buy or believe
because of the large numbers associated with the product or proposition.
5. Status
Example: Advertisement appearing
in the Hampshire Gazette, January 29, 1970: "President Washington,
when he addressed the two houses of Congress on the 8th instance, was dressed
in a crow-colored suit of American manufacture. This elegant fabric was
made from the manufactory in Hartford".
Meaning: Persons or objects
for which we have a strong sentiment of respect or esteem -- or which at
least possess some degree of fame or prestige -- are introduced into the
argument as endorsing that which we are asked to buy or believe.
6. Repetition
Example: Radio commercial:
"Get up with GET-UP, GET-UP’s got get up. Got it? Get it? Get GET-UP!".
Meaning: We buy or believe
because we have heard or seen the idea or product name so often.
7. Slogans
Example: "Wheatless, the breakfast
of champions"; "LSMFT" (Lusty Strife means Fine Tobacco); "When better
cars are built, Bluink will build them"; "Better buy Bards-Eye".
Meaning: A slogan is a short,
meaningful, catchy phrase or sentence intended for general consumption
and designed to terminate thought and promote action in favor of the slogan
maker. However true the slogan may be, if your action is merely a favorable
response to the slogan, the technique is successful.
8. Technical Jargon
Example: Advertisement: "Liberty
Rubber’s new tires contain Durium, the bonding material that makes these
tires wear for years".
Meaning: The technique of
technical jargon is the use of technical language or unfamiliar words,
whether contained in the dictionary or freshly coined, for the purpose
of impressing people.
9. Sophistical Formula
Example: Mrs Jones:
"You know, Ann, I think the Browns must be having trouble. The last two
mornings I’ve seen Tom Brown leave the house, slam the door, and drive
off in his car looking awfully mad. I’ll bet they’re headed for a divorce".
Mrs Smith: "I don’t know,
Barbara. Rally, they’ve always seemed to be very much in love".
Meaning: To shut off or close
the argument a popular maxim or old saying is quoted. But every controversial
situation must be settled in its own terms, and not on the merits (if any)
of some proverb.
Section D: What’s
Your Weakness? (Techniques of Exploitation)
1. Appeal to Pity
Example: Student to professor:
"I know that my test grades have been poor and that I deserve an F, but
my father is in the hospital and it will just break his heart if I get
an F in this course".
Meaning: An attempt is made
to secure our commitment by presenting the object of commitment as an object
of sympathy, thereby arousing our sympathetic feelings to the point where
these feelings determine favorable action.
2. Appeal to Flattery
Example: Salesman to young
matron answering the door: "Is your mother home?".
Meaning: An attempt is made
to persuade us to buy or believe by flattering us on our personal appearance
or in some other category where we excel or desire to excel.
3. Appeal to Ridicule
Example: The sergeant, on
the first day of class, having made a certain statement is asked an embarrassing
question by a member of the class. Preferring a cheap victory to an honest
discussion, the sergeant replies sarcastically, "I am afraid, Private Jones,
that I cannot understand what you mean. You are too deep for me". He then
goes on to the next questioner.
Meaning: An attempt is made
to influence us to accept a certain proposition by poking fun at those
who oppose the proposition.
4. Appeal to Prestige
Example: Real estate advertisement:
"Live in exclusive Broadmoor Terraces, where successful people live. Deluxe
executive apartments furnished in the Continental manner".
Meaning: An attempt is made
to induce you to buy or believe by stating or suggesting that such action
will secure or maintain prestige for you.
Status and Appeal to Prestige, though
related techniques, nevertheless represent quite different errors. In the
former case it is suggested that if Jones, a person possessing or allegedly
possessing status, buys or believes, so should you. There is no
implication that your buying or believeing will confer on you equivalent
status. The Appeal to Prestige suggests that you should buy or believe
because by so doing you will acquire or improve status.
5. Appeal to Prejudice
Example: A young man, wishing
to make a good impression on his girl friend’s father, learns that he is
a rabid Democrat. So one evening, while waiting for the daughter to finish
dressing, he engages the father in conversation, and the young man turns
the conversation to the point where he can rip to Republicans to pieces.
The father later informs the girl that the young man has "good stuff in
him and should go a long way".
Meaning: The one who makes
the appeal to prejudice attempts to persuade you to act or feel in a certain
way by associating his person, product or proposal with a certain one or
more of your prejudices, positive or negative --- a prejudice being a prejudgment
wrapped in emotion and having a history. Not only does he rekindle your
prejudice, he also arouses in you warm feelings toward the one (himself)
who apparently shares your prejudice. And so it becomes much easier to
make you believe or buy what ever he has to offer.
6. Bargain Appeal
Example: The supermarket has
a special display at the front of the store: canned peaches by the case
(8 cans) for "only $3.20". Checking the shelves where single cans of peaches
may be purchased, one finds the same brand priced at 40 cents per can.
Meaning: An attempt is made
to get you to buy by appealing to your desire to save money. If you buy
without making you own comparison as to price, quality, and service, the
technique is successful.
7. Folksy Appeal
Example: The salesman who
on meeting the prospect for the second (or even the first) time slaps him
on the back as if he were a long lost brother and addresses him by his
nickname.
Meaning: The user of this
device places himself or his product on a level of neighborly intimacy
with the reader or listener.
8. Join the Bandwagon Appeal
Example: "Vote for a winner,
Senator Simpkins".
Meaning: An effort is made
to influence you to act in a certain way by asserting or implying that
that is what is popular or what is the majority is doing.
9. Appeal to Practical Consequences
~
Example: Slip inserted in
workers’ pay envelopes: "If the Republicans do not win this election, this
factory will be forced to close its doors and you will be without a job".
Meaning: An effort is made
to persuade us to buy or believe by appealing to our concern for our own
individual welfare, i.e., if we do as we are asked, we will secure certain
beneficial consequences, while if we refuse to do as asked, the consequences
will be harmful.
10. Passing from the Acceptable
to the Dubious
Example: Advertisement: "The
boys in the service abroad want letters more than gifts. Write frequently
because some letters may be lost. Write only good news because there are
enough unpleasant things going on over there. Buy and write on Barton’s
Victory Stationery".
Meaning: The arguer states
a series of propositions. The early ones are readily acceptable to the
audience or reader, but the concluding statement may be dubious. The listener
or reader is expected to accept blindly the later ones because he has accepted
those which came before.
Section E: The
Fault May Be With The Form (Techniques of Form)
1. Concurrency
Example: "Who was president
at the time of World War I? Wilson, a Democrat. Who was President at the
time of World War II? Roosevelt, a Democrat. Who was President at the time
of the Korean War? Truman, a Democrat. Obviously, the Democratic party
is the war party".
Meaning: Because things exist
or appear simultaneously, it is claimed that one is the cause of the other.
The form of the argument is: A is present along with B; therefore A is
the cause of B. But two concurrents could never be the cause of one another,
for a cause is something antecedent in time.
2. Post Hoc
Example: "The bankers are
the source of our troubles. You will notice that every depression is preceded
by bank failures".
Meaning: Because two events
(or things) follow one another in close temporal succession the first event
is claimed to be the cause of the second. The form of the argument is:
A precedes B; therefore A is the cause of B. We may take as a hypothesis
for testing, that A is a (or the) cause of B, but we should not forget
that any one of a score of other preceding events is equally worthy of
consideration.
3. Selected Instances
Example: Someone says, "All
professors are conceited". When asked for his evidence he replies, "Well,
how about Professor Smith, Professor Jones, and Professor Brown. Everybody
knows they’re as conceited as they come". But he deliberately skips over
Professor Black whom he knows to be a model of humility.
Meaning: Support is drawn
for a position by choosing only those cases or instances which can back
it up and disregarding those cases or instances which either contradict
or do not support the position. The form of the argument is: All A is B;
because A1, A2, A3 and A4 are B. the form is invalid; the arguer knows
that at least A5 is not B.
4. Hasty Generalizations
Example: Having observed five
women to be poor drivers, Jones generalizes and declares all women are
poor drivers.
Meaning: The arguer jumps
to a general or blanket conclusion about members of a given group on the
basis of an unrepresentative or insufficient number of cases. The form
of the argument is: A1, A2, A3 are B; therefore all A is B.
Selected Instances and Hasty Generalization
have much the same effect. There are important differences, however. Hasty
Generalization typically occurs on an emotional basis, while selected instances
is typically coldly calculating. In the former case there is, at the time
at least, no awareness of opposed instances; in the latter case, there
is. Selected Instances is not merely crooked thinking but dishonesty. On
the surface the two are apt to look alike, and until we have evidence that
the arguer is really deliberately closing his eyes to contradictory cases,
we cannot label the technique as Selected Instances.
5. Faulty Analogy
Example: "Last quarter I had
a student by the name of Orzymski who did good work. This quarter I have
another student by that name, and I’m expecting good work from him".
Meaning: To reason analogically
is to reason that because two of more things or types of things are alike
in some one or more respects (we may call this the antecedent resemblance),
they will therefore be found alike in some other respect(s) --- the consequent
resemblance. In cases of reliable analogies the antecedent factor is already
known to have some bearing on the consequent factor. In faulty analogies
such knowledge is lacking. The form of the argument is: A is like B in
respect c; therefore A is like B in respect d.
In our example, while it is true
that Orzymski is a rare name in English-speaking societies and while it
is even probable that a second Orzymski enrolled at the same college would
be related to the first, we need evidence that heredity is a decisive factor
in scholastic performance. But an analogy is no stronger than its linking
generalization, which in this case is "Heredity determines scholastic performance".
Since our experience contains an abundance of cases of relatives with widely
different scholastic records, we can have no confidence in an analogy based
on such a linking generalization.
Some arguments take the form of alleging
a complete analogy: two things are alike to the point of identity. The
argument is: A (or all A) is c and B (or all B) is c; therefore B is A
(or A is B). "Communists will not take the oath of allegiance and neither
will Jones. Therefore he must be a Communist". The absurdity of this argument
becomes readily evident when we see it is just like saying, "Dogs have
tails; this cat has a tail; so this cat is a dog".
In discussing Metaphor and Simile
the point was made that neither one, especially Metaphor, should be used
in controversial situations. That remains true. But a metaphor or simile
appearing by itself is to an argument, and is very uncertain in meaning.
Analogies make use of simile and make clear how A is compared to B, but
it still must be said that analogical argument is strong only when A and
B are essentially the same thing, and A has a property deriving from its
essential nature, therefore B must have the same property.
6. Composition
Example: "He’s a nice boy;
she’s a nice girl. I’m sure they’ll make a nice married couple".
Meaning: We reason as if the
properties of elements or individuals were always (i.e., necessarily) the
properties of the wholes which they constitute. But the assumption that
what holds true of a part is automatically true of the whole cannot be
justified. The form of the argument is: A is part of B and A is c; therefore
B is c.
7. Division
Example: "How dare you criticize
any member of the Harvard faculty? Don’t you know that this faculty has
the highest reputation of any university faculty in the United States?".
Meaning: We reason as if the
properties of any whole are always (i.e., necessarily) properties of each
part. But the assumption that what holds true of a whole is automatically
true of its parts cannot be justified. The form of the argument is: A is
part of B and B is c; therefore A is c.
8. Non Sequitur
Example: "Your children deserve
the best milk. Buy Lorden’s".
Meaning: The conclusion is
not necessitated by the premise(s).
Strictly speaking, all the
techniques so far covered where the conclusion is invalid are Non Sequiturs.
There is, therefore, no one form for a Non Sequitur. In the example cited
above no more reason is given to buy Lorden’s milk than to buy Healtest
or any one of a hundred other brands of milk.
Since the Non Sequitur label can
be applied to so many other techniques, the label will be reserved on for
those invalidities that cannot be classified under some other heading.
They are, at least, Non Sequiturs.
Section F: Tricks
of Argument (Techniques of Maneuver)
1. Diversion
Example: Jones: "I
think that American industry should be run on a profit-sharing basis".
Smith: "Really! I don’t think
so. I don’t see any obligation on the part of owners to share profits with
their employees".
Jones: "Profit-sharing will
provide the worker with greater incentive".
Smith: "Workers don’t need
more incentive. They need higher wages. I remember the wages I got as a
boy, working in the bean fields. They were pitifully low".
Jones: "Yes, they were. I
remember those bean-picker wages. As I recall, Smith, you were the best
picker in the field".
Smith: "No, Jones, I beg
to differ. You were the best picker".
Meaning: To divert is to get
off the subject. With the original issue left unresolved, one of the disputants
begins to talk of something which has no apparent evidential value for
his thesis. The diversion is full (instead of merely partial) when the
second party to the argument "accepts the diversion and joins in discussion
or argument over the new issue.
2. Disproving a Minor Point
Example: Jones: I believe
that the installment system of buying has been a boon to America, since
(1) it has enable the ordinary man to have what has hitherto been only
a luxury for the well-to-do; (2) it has raised the standard of living;
(3) it has provided employment for many clerks, typists, etc., who must
keep installment accounts".
Smith: "After all, the head
of a gang of thieves provides gainful employment, and so any defense of
installment buying on the grounds of its providing employment is silly
and evades the question as whether this kind of employment is desirable.
Therefore, I don’t see that you have presented any substantial reason for
favoring installment buying".
Meaning: When you have, say,
two or more pieces of evidence of varying degrees of importance, your opponent
takes on of the less weighty of your arguments (perhaps a rather trivial
point) and discredits that. He then acts as if (or attempts to create the
impression that) he has disproved your whole case.
3. Ad Hominem
Example: Smith: "This
town needs more efficient and vigorous police protection. Some on the police
force should be retired and some should be fired".
Jones: "Absolutely not. And
who are you to talk about improving our police protection? As I recall,
30 years ago you did time for forgery".
Meaning: Instead of attacking
your proposition, your opponent directs his argument against you as a person.
Although a person’s past record is something one should take into consideration,
it should not be one’s sole basis for judging an argument.
The Ad Hominem attack often takes
the form of discounting a proposition by attributing prejudice or bias
to its supporters. But what motivates is to believe as we do, say what
we say, is one thing. The truth or falsity, validity or invalidity, of
what we say is another. It is possible to be prejudiced but right.
Another form of Ad Hominem is charging
your opponent with the inconsistency of not living up to what he advocates.
4. Appeal to Ignorance
Example: "I know that man’s
soul is immortal. Why? Because you can’t prove that it isn’t".
Meaning: A proposition (1)
is said to be true because it has not been disproved or (2) is said to
be untrue because it has not been proved.
What is not disproved on a given
occasion is not necessarily true. Is a scientific theory accepted as true
because you cannot disprove it? Rather, the theory must be verified positively
Every person who presents a proposition in argument has the obligation
to offer at least one reason in defense of it.
Likewise, your opponent’s successful
attack on all premises or reasons you advance does not in all strictness
make his position right or yours wrong. All he has shown is that your position
is not true for your reasons. Other people, now or later, may be able to
produce better reasons. Similarly, your being able to show that your adversary
in his defense has involved himself in contradiction is not sufficient
to prove him wrong. Smith may be arguing that the taking of life is evil,
but admits that he doesn’t object to killing animals for food. There is
a contradiction and confusion, but Smith may still be right that the taking
of life is evil.
5. Leading Question
Example: (1) "It was early
in the morning, wasn’t it?".
(2) "Since when have you stopped
drinking?"
Meaning: A leading question
is one which (1) dictates or suggests an answer or (2) one which incriminates
the answerer (or places him in an undesirable position) no matter how he
answers. In the first example the answer "Yes" is natural and is apt to
be forthcoming, especially if the person to whom the question is addressed
is highly suggestible and/or half awake. In the second example an answer
in a form appropriate to the question ("Since Tuesday") would still be
an admission that one did drink.
Under the second form of Leading
Question may be included any question which assumes as true that which
is yet controversial and undecided. "Why is it that labor leaders are so
much less concerned about the general welfare than are the leaders of business?".
The one to whom the question is addressed tends to ask himself, "Now why
is that?", when he ought to immediately respond, "Wait a minute! Let’s settle
first whether it is true that they are less concerned".
6. Complex Question
Example: "Do you deny that
you were in the room at the time of the murder? Do you deny that you have
always hated the man? Do you deny that if you couldn’t have killed him
yourself you would have been glad to have someone else do the dirty job?
Answer me, ‘yes’ or ‘no’".
Meaning: A series of questions
are put and then the questioner demands that they be answered as a whole
by either "yes" or "no". Since there is always the possibility that the
answerer needs to answer each of the questions separately and differently,
the complex question puts the answerer in an unfair position.
Although the questions contained
in the series may each be a leading question, the complex question differs
in that separate answers are not desired.
7. Inconsequent Argument
Example: Prosecuting Attorney:
"The defendant is charged with assault and attempted robbery. There can
be no doubt of this man’s guilt. In the past ten years he has been convicted
13 times on different charges of forgery, theft, and rape. (The prosecutor
then goes into each of these cases in detail, He passes to the jurors documents
that support what he has said about the defendant’s record) the sickening
record that I have exhibited speaks for itself. Gentlemen, I ask for a
verdict of ‘guilty’".
Meaning: The arguer proves
or establishes something, but not what he said he would prove.
In the example given above, surely
proof of a previous bad record is a far cry from proof of guilt in the
offenses charged. Proof of a bad record is "inconsequential" --- of no
consequence. If bad record proves guilt, then for every crime there are
millions of guilty people.
Inconsequent Argument differs from
Diversion is that in the latter nothing is proved, whereas in the former
something has been proven, though not what the arguer was expected to prove.
8. Attacking a Straw Man
Example: (1) Smith:
"I am opposed to capital punishment".
Jones: "I’m not".
Smith: "You ought to be.
Capital punishment is unchristian".
Jones: "People like you who
oppose punishing criminals nauseate me".
(2) Smith: "I am opposed to
capital punishment".
Jones: "You fellows that
are against capital punishment must want your daughters molested every
time they leave the house!".
Meaning: Your opponent either
(1) restates your position falsely or (2) exaggerates the consequences
that may follow from your position.
9. Victory by Definition
Example: Jones: "Communism
cannot help but work".
Smith: "I disagree. Look
at Russia; things are in a mess there".
Jones: "Oh, sure, but that’s
not real communism".
Smith: "Look at China; communism
is not working there".
Jones: "They don’t have communism
there either".
Meaning: A position is defined
in such a way as to exclude all negative cases or adverse evidence.
Evidently Jones is defining
"communism" as "that political system which cannot help but work". This
certainly does not accurately report how most people use the term. Instead
of destroying Smith’s position by evidence, Jones leaves him no ground
for an opposing position and so destroys the argument as a whole. The same
effect would have been secured if Jones had started out saying, "True communism
cannot help but work".
10. Begging the Question
Example: (1) "Man is a social
animal because he is gregarious".
(2) Jones (at the bank): "I
would like a loan".
Banker: "What recommendations of
references do you have, something to establish that if we loan you the
money, you will pay it back?".
Jones: "Well, I can refer
you to my friend Quimby; he’ll vouch for me. He’ll tell you that when I
say I’ll pay, I will".
Banker: "But we don’t know
Quimby, so how do we know he can be trusted?".
Jones: "Oh, I can assure you that
Quimby can be trusted".
Meaning: This technique involves
assuming as true what has yet to be proved. Frequently the same proposition
is used both as premise and as conclusion in a single argument. This may
be done either (1) by the use of synonymous terms or (2) by circular argument,
which involves the use of A to prove B and B to prove A.
IV. The Experts Game [Not
included here]
V. Summary
As was pointed out in the introduction,
the PROPAGANDA GAME is intended to be an introduction to "clear thinking",
not a completed course of study. As a followup to the game we recommend
Dr Moulds' book, Thinking Straighter. Dr Moulds' book includes more
comprehensive treatment of the techniques used in the PROPAGANDA GAME with
added examples, a chapter on The External Marks of Authority ---
Who Says It? Why Does He Say It? and What Is The Medium of the Argument?
--- and a chapter on Internal Criteria of Reliability --- Documented
Evidence, Sound Generalization, Internal Consistency, Impartial Treatment,
Valid Deduction, and Probable Prediction. After reading this book you should
be thinking straighter. You should become more accurate and precise in
the use of words and more demanding of precision on the part of others.
You should be more careful in drawing your own conclusions and less ready
to accept at first glance the conclusions of others. The book is published
by the Wm. C. Brown Co (Dubuque, IA).
In conclusion, in a free and democratic
society, it is incumbent upon every citizen to be well informed on propaganda
techniques. Every citizen should, therefore, play the PROPAGANDA GAME (We're
sure you will want to label this technique).
VI. Suggested Answers [Not
included here]
VII. Appendix [Not included
here]
|