Episode 193: What Are You Thinking, Really?

I’ve been noticing a particular debate tactic lately that, once used, allows the user to claim victory based on nothing other than their claim.

A friend of mine insists that racism hasn’t gotten any better than it was decades ago. The fact that a black man was President of the United States for 2 terms doesn’t change that. The fact that Jim Crow laws don’t exist anymore doesn’t change that. What he insists is true is that most racism these days is hidden or covert, as opposed to seen, obvious, and overt.

If you express doubt as to whether this is true, he will tell you that you are part of the problem since you obviously don’t truly see or understand the problem. So either you believe that there is covert racism, or you harbor covert racism, even if you don’t realize you harbor it. You either recognize the problem, or you are the problem. But here’s the thing; his position is unfalsifiable. You can’t prove him wrong. No matter what you say, you reinforce his belief.

This is a logical fallacy, and I explore other examples of this.

Mentioned links:

Logical Fallacies

Politico’s tone-deaf, unhelpful cartoon about conservatives being rescued from Harvey by the government

Show transcript

I’ve been noticing a particular debate tactic lately that, once used, allows the user to claim victory based on nothing other than their claim. I tried looking it up as a logical fallacy, but couldn’t find one (in my quick search).

First of all, what is a logical fallacy? It’s an attempt to prove using flawed reasoning, and they all have names.  If you argue that something is true because a particular smart person believes it’s true, that’s an Appeal to Authority. I’ve mentioned here a number of times the Straw Man Fallacy. That’s where you’re opponent misstates your position, making it weaker than it really is, and argues against the weaker position.

I tried to find something that matches what I’ve been seeing but I didn’t. Perhaps one of you can clue me in. In the meantime, I’m calling this the Secret Sin Fallacy. Let me give a couple examples of this

A friend of mine insists that racism hasn’t gotten any better than it was decades ago. The fact that a black man was President of the United States for 2 terms doesn’t change that. The fact that Jim Crow laws don’t exist anymore doesn’t change that. What he insists is true is that most racism these days is hidden or covert, as opposed to seen, obvious, and overt.

If you express doubt as to whether this is true, he will tell you that you are part of the problem since you obviously don’t truly see or understand the problem. So either you believe that there is covert racism, or you harbor covert racism, even if you don’t realize you harbor it. You either recognize the problem, or you are the problem. But here’s the thing; his position is unfalsifiable. You can’t prove him wrong. No matter what you say, you reinforce his belief.

Further, this allows him to claim that the problem (in this case, racism) is as large and as prevalent as he wishes it to be, because it’s all hidden, and in many cases, totally unknown to the racist. How do you argue against that?

Here’s another example. The presidency of Donald Trump has brought out a host of closet psychoanalysts. These are people who know what Trump really means when he says things. When he says things the Left would agree with, they assume he doesn’t really mean it. They insist they know what he really means, and there’s no way to prove them wrong. He can be as racist or xenophobic or whatever as they want him to be, because they know what he thinks secretly.

(OK, I will admit that Trump does himself no favors with som...