Aristotle with the Dutch translation of
De Sophisticis Elenchis, in English Sophistical Refutations
De Sophisticis Elenchis, in English Sophistical Refutations
When Aristotle wrote his book on fallacies
(De Sophisticis Elenchis,
in English Sophistical Refutations) he will not have realized that it
would last 1500 years before it would become a standard work of argumentation.
This book, which belongs to his Organon (a collection of six
methodological works), is the first systematical treatise on reasoning ever
written. It analyzes a range of fallacies often used by people in their
argumentations and it describes also how to perform a discussion. The book was
especially directed against the Sophists. These were, as the Encyclopaedia Britannica
tells me, “lecturers, writers, and teachers in the 5th and 4th centuries
BCE, most of whom traveled about the
Greek-speaking world giving instruction in a wide range of subjects in return
for fees.” Basically what the Sophists did was okay, but some – or too many –
applied intentionally false arguments in order to win their debates and so to
earn money. It made that the Sophists got a bad reputation. For Aristotle it
was a reason to write his book.
After some
time the Sophistical Refutations and most other works written by
Aristotle became forgotten. At least this was so in Europe for in the Arab
world they remained influential. Only from the 12th century on they became
known again in Europe, especially thanks to the Arab philosopher Averroes and
Jewish scholars in Andalusia. Also the Sophistical Refutations was
rediscovered and it became even the standard work for argumentation till far in
the twentieth century, although it didn’t remain without criticism. We saw
already in my blog two weeks ago that Descartes was not satisfied with
Aristotle’s argumentation theory, because it was only useful for arranging knowledge but
not for acquiring new knowledge. The authoritative status of the Sophistical Refutations was only undermined when Charles Hamblin published in 1970 his book Fallacies.
Since then it is still seen as an important book on sound reasoning, but it is
recognized that there is more to say about argumentation and that Aristotle’s
theory must be adapted and supplemented in view of later developments.
I just
started reading Aristotle’s book, so I don’t know whether he treats the fallacy
under another name, but one that Aristotle certainly doesn’t discuss is the Reductio
ad Hitlerum, the “Reduction to Hitler”, a term coined by professor Leo
Strauss in 1951. Sometimes the fallacy is also called the Argumentum ad
Hitlerum (Argument to Hitler) or “Playing the Nazi-card”. It’s a version of
the association fallacy, which says: A has property p and B
has also has property p, so A and B are the same (at least
in some relevant aspects). In the case of the Reductio ad Hitlerum the
reasoning is that someone has a certain view and, since this view was also held
by Hitler, this person is wrong. For instance, it’s not good to be a
vegetarian, because Hitler was also a vegetarian.
Forty
years later the American attorney and author Mike Godwin developed the Argumentum
ad Hitlerum into what became known as Godwin’s Law: “As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a
comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches 1”. So, if an Internet
discussion lasts long enough, sooner or later a statement by one of the
participants will get the reply “Hitler (or the Nazis) said the same”. But, as
my example just given made clear, a view hold by Hitler is not automatically
wrong. Even so, such an argument can pollute a debate, which makes that some
moderators of Internet discussions have decided to finish a thread, as soon as
the Argumentum ad Hitlerum is
put forward. Of course, someone can use the Hitler-argument with the intention
to end a discussion, but often people use incorrect arguments like this one
without knowing that they are fallacies. They sincerely belief that their
factual fallacies are sound arguments. In view of the latter, although it is
true that the time has come to improve and supplement Aristotle’s Sophistical
Refutations, even after more than 2300 years it still keeps its value.
No comments:
Post a Comment