Enter Contact Information Here

"Reality has a well-known liberal bias." 

Facebook Twitter Gplus YouTube Zazzle RSS

Logic has a liberal bias! (case studies from the Boston Bombing)

Fallacy Examples

If you were forced to go to college, you probably remember that “logic” has all kinds of rules. The recent Boston Bombing event provides a good case study to prove that these so-called “logic rules” have a liberal bias.

By now, we all know that the two brothers responsible for the Boston Marathon bombing incident were Islamic and were originally from Chechnya. Based on these facts, there are a number of conservatives on websites and on the news who have made very keen observations, and who have come to a variety of very reasonable, very sound conclusions. For example:


“Ha, ha! Stupid liberals were trying to blame ‘right-wing extremist’!  Well, the fact that these people are foreign Islamists just proves that there is NO SUCH THING as right-wing terrorism!”

“This is more proof that all Muslims are murderous and hateful!”

“These people are obviously members of Al Qaeda!”

“Obama got re-elected, and now this? See what happens when you vote for a liberal president!!!”

“Clearly Obama is incompetent, because one of the things that happens when you have an incompetent president is attacks on our own soil.”


All of these are clearly excellent arguments and are perfectly valid.

Unfortunately, the Tyrannical Left is trying to insist that these conclusions are not warranted, saying that they involve “logical fallacies”. Let’s take a look:

Conclusion: Some liberals claimed the bombers were probably American right-wing extremists. They were wrong. Therefore, there is no such thing as American right-wing extremism.

Liberal academics will call this kind of reasoning “cherry picking” or the fallacy of anecdotal evidence. They call this a form of over-generalization that is based on taking one particular case where the claim of “right-wing extremism” was false, and concluding from it that all claims of “right-wing extremism are false.”

Conclusion: Al Qaeda are terrorists. These two people are terrorists. Therefore, these two are obviously associated with Al Qaeda.

Liberal academics will call this kind of reasoning the fallacy of the undistributed middle. This basically means that just because two things share a property, doesn’t mean they are related or the same. This kind of fancy terminology is why most good conservatives fall asleep in college classes.

Conclusion: First, Obama got re-elected. Then, this terrorist attack happens. Therefore, this terrorist attack was caused by people voting for Obama.

Liberal elitist snobs will whip out some of that fancy Latin stuff on you and call this the fallacy of post hoc ergo propter hoc. Basically this means that just because A happened before B doesn’t mean that A caused B.

Conclusion: If a president is incompetent, then you can expect things like terrorism and crime to increase. Terrorism has increased.  Therefore, this president is incompetent.

No-good left-wing academics will call this kind of reasoning the fallacy of affirming the consequent. Basically this means that if you have a sentence that says “If A then B”, you can’t conclude that just because B is true then also A will be true.

 


 

In the days that follow, there will no doubt be more good conservatives coming to reasonable conclusions like these, and yet there will also no doubt be buzz-kill liberals throwing around fancy University words like “fallacy” to try to rain on their parades.

So keep your eyes peeled for the comments sections on the internet! If you ever see a liberal saying something like, “That’s a logical fallacy!” then just make sure you call them out, by yelling: “LOGIC HAS A LIBERAL BIAS!”

 

Editor’s Note:  For your convenience, below, we will share with you a more complete list of so-called “logical fallacies”.  If you are a true conservative, and want to help the conservative movement, make sure you use as many of these as possible whenever you are arguing with liberals.  It will really piss them off:

 

Complete list of fallacies.

 

 
4 Comments  comments 

4 Responses

  1. Ryan

    Good news! I just figured out that logic doesn’t have a liberal bias and Your blog brought it to my attention. See if you can spot the logical fallacy common to each of the following:

    ——–
    “Ha, ha! Stupid liberals were trying to blame ‘right-wing extremist’! Well, the fact that these people are foreign Islamists just proves that there is NO SUCH THING as right-wing terrorism!”

    “This is more proof that all Muslims are murderous and hateful!”

    “These people are obviously members of Al Qaeda!”

    “Obama got re-elected, and now this? See what happens when you vote for a liberal president!!!”

    “Clearly Obama is incompetent, because one of the things that happens when you have an incompetent president is attacks on our own soil.”
    ——–

    Were you able to figure it out? The common logical fallacy is called a straw man argument. In the straw man argument, what you do is caricature your opponents’ arguments and then show how silly they are. You may be surprised but every one of these straw man arguments came from a liberal blog. In fact, they are all direct quotes from your current post! So rest easy; logic deserts liberals, too.

    http://xkcd.com/386/

    • My friend, I would be so much happier if all of these statements WERE nothing more than exaggerated straw-man arguments contrived for comedic effect. I really would be.

      Unfortunately, I listen to conservative talk radio. I listen to Rush, and Sean Hannity, and Mark Levin. Now, you might say that they are not representative of ALL conservatives, and should not be taken as a measure of the “smart” conservatives, and you may be right about that.

      Nonetheless, Sean Hannity regularly makes arguments of the form: “I know that Islam is a hateful religion because these Muslims did such-and-such.”

      Rush Limbaugh regularly makes the “post hoc ergo propter hoc” argument that because something bad happened after Obama got elected, therefore it’s Obama’s fault.

      Mark Levin regularly uses the distraction method of saying “Right-wing extremism is a myth, and I know that it is because THIS PARTICULAR CASE was a case of Muslim extremism.”

      It may not be your friends who are making these arguments, but I assure you that all of these are REAL arguments that are being made, by real conservatives out there in the public eye.

      • Ryan

        Please provide a sourced quote from a confirmed conservative source (e.g., it can’t be from a comment on a website as those can easily be faked or written by a 13 year old) for each of your above caricatures — within appropriate context lest you befall the “quoting out of context” fallacy http://www.fallacyfiles.org/quotcont.html — and then I’ll believe you.

        Until then, merely stating that you hear stuff like this all the time is really no better; it merely compounds your reliance on logical fallacies. As it is, you are committing a second logical fallacy, that of “appeal to authority” and the authority you are claiming is you!

        http://www.logicalfallacies.info/relevance/appeals/appeal-to-authority/

        • Well, I’m afraid I don’t have access to transcripts of the radio programs. Mea culpa. But just for the record, I’m not referring to “comments on blogs” or any other such thing. I gave you specific names of specific “conservative authorities”, such as Sean Hannity and Rush Limbaugh, who use this kind of rhetoric commonly.

          The fact that I can’t refer you to a transcript of these radio shows means that you will probably not be convinced–which is logical, and I completely understand.

          But since you DO seem to be a rational person, I will simply end by saying this: Take a listen, some time. I know that it’s appealing to dismiss the extremist rhetoric of conservatives you don’t like as outliers, or to simply not pay attention to conservatives who say things that don’t conform to YOUR person view of conservatism.

          I will even admit that my instinct is to do the same thing, when a “crazy liberal” says something that *I* disagree with. 🙂

          But unfortunately, this kind of rhetoric IS out there. Whether you like it or not. It’s coming from your own party. And I think it would serve you, and conservatism more generally, better for the SMART conservatives like you to stand up against it when it happens…. instead of pretending that it doesn’t exist.

          Thanks for the discussion, though. It’s been a pleasure.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

© LiberalBias.com 2011-2015


Google+