"Excuse me, gentlemen, I couldn't help overhearing ..."

February 3, 2024 7:47 AM

Do you have trouble keeping the logical fallacies straight? Who better to explain them than Mr. Spock.
YouTuber CHDanhauser has made a series of old-fashioned PSAs of about three to five minutes each, using the ST:TOS:TAS characters to explain fallacies and rhetorical devices. Recent entries include guilt or honor by association, neglect of probability, the "if by whiskey" fallacy, and presentism -- featuring a sentient dolphin from the water planet of Argo.

Previously: Star Trek, the Animated Series.

posted by Countess Elena (17 comments total)

If only it were so easy to convince people they were thinking illogically.
posted by adamrice at 8:29 AM on February 3 [2 favorites]

That would be best.
posted by The Great Big Mulp at 8:34 AM on February 3 [1 favorite]

I predict the future of this earthly human race
Is that having made a mess of Earth, they'll move to outer space!
Well ... there goes the neighborhood.
Totally, completely, absolutely, irrevocably, highly illogical!
posted by credulous at 9:03 AM on February 3 [5 favorites]

I loved the cameos by Baron Karza, Quisp, a sleestak, etc. in "If by Whiskey"!
posted by Wobbuffet at 9:04 AM on February 3

fascinating
posted by gauche at 9:12 AM on February 3 [1 favorite]

I had a recent argument where I told the other person that their argument sucked because it was just an appeal to the majority. They replied that I was saying they were wrong because other people agreed. I then had to point out that's the fallacy fallacy. They're not necessarily wrong because they appealed to the majority; it's just a flawed argument.

They were quiet for a bit and then started asking me loaded questions. When I told them they were begging the question, they became tired of talking to me. Yay, logic?
posted by betaray at 9:20 AM on February 3 [2 favorites]

If only it were so easy to convince people they were thinking illogically.

I can’t recall who made the observation that if we had a verb meaning “to believe incorrectly,” it would have no first person present tense conjugation.
posted by ricochet biscuit at 9:50 AM on February 3 [2 favorites]

Interesting, then, that Spock responsible for sometimes confusing 'rational' with 'logical'. Humans don't behave or feel according to logic. We act rationally, irrationally, unthinkingly, judiciously, sensibly or inexplicably (to others). We often fail, or refuse, to see the lack of evidence for our beliefs. But evidence doesn't enter into logic. Evidence is empirical. Logic is the formulation where the truth of something is contained in the premises. A = B and B = C then A = C. You don't have to look to the world, or collect data, to know if that's true. If all politicians are corrupt and Biden is a politician, then Biden is corrupt. Logic!

But the statement that 'all politicians are corrupt' needs evidence, the truth of it is not contained in the statement, and it's not reasonable to think it's true without evidence. So when Spock accused the humans of not behaving logically, he usually meant 'without reason' (again, according to him) because logically, people can believe ridiculous things based on a faulty premise.
posted by mygraycatbongo at 10:42 AM on February 3 [2 favorites]

Spock responsible for sometimes confusing

o_O

logically, people can believe ridiculous things based on a faulty premise

Yes. For example, people can believe "Spock is mistaken" based on the premise "The meaning of any given word, a priori, will not change even slightly over the course of 200+ years".

_\\//
posted by Flunkie at 10:50 AM on February 3

"Yes. For example, people can believe "Spock is mistaken" based on the premise "The meaning of any given word, a priori, will not change even slightly over the course of 200+ years".

I suspect this is supposed to be some sort of rebuttal but to what I don't know.
posted by mygraycatbongo at 11:14 AM on February 3 [1 favorite]

The fallacy of presentism should be considered very thoughtfully. Some comments under that one seem to think that the conversation in the video shows that liberal and leftist discourse on history is nothing but presentism writ large. It's very important, after all, to draw analogies as well as possible, lest your audience draw incorrect conclusions from them.
posted by Rustic Etruscan at 12:39 PM on February 3

The meaning of any given word, a priori, will not change even slightly over the course of 200+ years".

According to Diane Duane, the Vulcan word translated as "logic" in English...

actually, I think this is too dorky a tangent even for Metafilter.
posted by The Manwich Horror at 1:11 PM on February 3 [1 favorite]

actually, I think this is too dorky a tangent even for Metafilter.

No such animal exists. The word is c'thia, meaning "reality-truth."
posted by bryon at 4:36 PM on February 3 [5 favorites]

It seems to be a thing nowdays, where people think illogically on purpose. It is all about emotional wants, desires, and thinking, and bullying to get what they want. Explaining the logical fallacy of their thinking won't get you very far with such people, because that's the whole point.

It will only work with people who favor rationality, even while knowing, as mygraycatbongo says, we are basically illogical creatures.
posted by eye of newt at 4:42 PM on February 3

Star Trek: Reply Guy
posted by phooky at 5:56 PM on February 3 [3 favorites]

Yes! To be honest, part of the charm is how they all seem to be thinking "oh boy, here we go, hunker down"
posted by Countess Elena at 7:03 AM on February 4

"another black eye, Mr. Spock?"
posted by elkevelvet at 2:03 PM on February 5 [1 favorite]