Woman Shows Examples Of 5 Common Logical Fallacies Being Used Against The Black Lives Matter Movement Interview With Author
Graphic designer Noelle Cress got seriously fed up with racism deniers, especially in the light of the George Floyd protests and Black Lives Matter movement.
To separate facts from fiction and point out just how flawed some of their arguments are, she compiled 5 common logical fallacies to avoid. Laid all out in black on white, these fallacies point out why commonly used examples when talking about racism and police brutality just don’t work.
It turns out, every fallacy has a smart name too, like “red herring” or “straw man,” and with the help of easy-to-read infographics, we now know which examples are never gonna work in a fair and respectful debate.
More info: Instagram | NoelleCress.com
Noelle listed these common logical fallacies to avoid for a productive discussion
Image credits: noelle.cress
After she shared the post, the common fallacies quickly spread throughout social media
Image credits: noelle.cress
Image credits: noelle.cress
Bored Panda reached out to Noelle Cress, the graphic designer behind the viral logical fallacy graphics, to find out more about this amazing project. Noelle said she saw a lot of the same flawed arguments being made over and over again on social media.
“I also saw a lot of emotionally-charged, frustrated people arguing with each other in comment sections who kept repeating their own arguments while completely missing the point of the other person’s argument.”
“As a result,” she said, “people usually left those debates more thoroughly convinced of the opinion they already had and less willing to engage in reasonable conversation in the future.”
Image credits: noelle.cress
Image credits: noelle.cress
Image credits: noelle.cress
The designer hopes that being open to new information and changing your opinion will become normalized. “Acknowledging that your previous opinion of something was wrong based on new information is an important part of personal growth and shows maturity.”
Noelle believes that every one of us needs to be more critical towards our news sources, both TV and social media.
Image credits: noelle.cress
Image credits: noelle.cress
Image credits: noelle.cress
Image credits: noelle.cress
With half a million people turning out in 550 places across the US, the Black Lives Matter protests reached their peak on June 6. Recent polls showed that around 15 to 26 million people in the country have participated in demonstrations over the death of George Floyd and other victims.
The actual number of people who protested according to polls are as follows: 15 million on June 4-10 (Pew), 18 million on June 11-15 (N.O.R.C.), 23 million on June 12-22 (Civis Analytics), and 26 million on June 8-14 (Kaiser Family Foundation). The participation in the recent Black Lives Matter protests surpassed the Women’s March of 2017, which had a turnout of about three million to five million people on a single day.
Another factor showing just how important the protests have been for the country’s recent history is how widespread the movement was. Kenneth Andrews, a sociology professor at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, told the New York Times: “The geographic spread of protest is a really important characteristic and helps signal the depth and breadth of a movement’s support.”
And this is what people had to say about them
You could include using unrelated statistics in an attempt to weaken an argument. e.g. "There are more people killed by car accidents than there are killed by police." That's like saying there are more grains of sand on a Florida beach than there are taxis in Montana. One doesn't have anything to do with the other.
I think that falls under "red herring."
P.S. to K- There is a beautiful, small city park here that came from land donated by your family/ surnamesake!
Just as a note, this person did not invent these terms, just connect them to these points. These terms have existed for years, and are used in discussions of bad arguments by both left wing and right wing advocates. Not a bad clarification for these terms, though a wider net of examples may make these more educational.
My thoughts exactly. Reading comments on other sites (and sometimes here), I get the impression that people have forgotten how to have an argument and that certainly isn't exclusive to debates about the BLM movement.
This comment is hidden. Click here to view.
"These terms have existed for years, and are used in discussions of bad arguments by both left wing and right wing advocates." I can't help but think the latter part of that sentence is some sort of fallacy ;)
This comment is hidden. Click here to view.
It's a joke y'all. As the post says read the whole thing (see the smiley face at the end?) and avoid knee jerk reactions! Up voted you
The biggest problem here is that most Americans never receive any formal training in formal logic. We don't teach it in schools, at least not until the college level. And even then, it's not a required class for anything I know of. Maybe a philosophy degree, I suppose. If you don't teach children how to think logically, they never learn how as adults. Thanks very much for this post, because it's something we desperately need.
That's because one of the American political parties hates educating the masses and encourages their constituents to be as stupid and easy to lead as possible. The other pretends to care, but benefits from the idiots who look down on "book larnin" so we have one of the biggest jokes of an "education" in the world. Remember, if Sister Bertha Betternyouse gets her religious panties in a bunch, her male overseers will go lobby and bribe to stop schoolchildren from learning basic science/sex ed/ that gay people exist. The fact that "intelligent design" is even a thing shows how pathetic America is.
My point exactly. Americans as a whole are woefully undereducated, and I can't help but think that's on purpose. Once is happenstance, twice is coincidence, three times is conspiracy.. and this has been going on for decades.
This comment is hidden. Click here to view.
Actually your absolutely incredible level of hubris is the only pathetic thing here.
I took logic in college. I was a political science major. [Insert joke here.]
Then you're probably more qualified than most politicians. No joke intended.
I wholeheartedly disagree. Critical thinking starts at a very early age. Now they're grown. Both were a+ student's, ones a much can and the other an artist. My son is the eldest and mucisian..my daughter is 14. IVE NEVRT HAD TO DICIPLINE THEM BUT ONCE EACH.
That's a logical fallacy; specifically the anecdotal evidence fallacy described herein. Your argument is invalid, sorry.
This comment is hidden. Click here to view.
And although you JUST said think logically. Reading these post doesn’t make you think. They’re literally telling you how you should talk to people and all of it is incorrect. Debates exist for a reason. Calling people out on their lies and bullshit is one of the good things. And this is all bullshit.
These may not make you think, but they encourage it. When you can recognize logical fallacies in your own arguments, you understand that you need to dig further. Any list of logical fallacies is not the be-all-end-all but it's a useful tool in the kit.
You could include using unrelated statistics in an attempt to weaken an argument. e.g. "There are more people killed by car accidents than there are killed by police." That's like saying there are more grains of sand on a Florida beach than there are taxis in Montana. One doesn't have anything to do with the other.
I think that falls under "red herring."
P.S. to K- There is a beautiful, small city park here that came from land donated by your family/ surnamesake!
Just as a note, this person did not invent these terms, just connect them to these points. These terms have existed for years, and are used in discussions of bad arguments by both left wing and right wing advocates. Not a bad clarification for these terms, though a wider net of examples may make these more educational.
My thoughts exactly. Reading comments on other sites (and sometimes here), I get the impression that people have forgotten how to have an argument and that certainly isn't exclusive to debates about the BLM movement.
This comment is hidden. Click here to view.
"These terms have existed for years, and are used in discussions of bad arguments by both left wing and right wing advocates." I can't help but think the latter part of that sentence is some sort of fallacy ;)
This comment is hidden. Click here to view.
It's a joke y'all. As the post says read the whole thing (see the smiley face at the end?) and avoid knee jerk reactions! Up voted you
The biggest problem here is that most Americans never receive any formal training in formal logic. We don't teach it in schools, at least not until the college level. And even then, it's not a required class for anything I know of. Maybe a philosophy degree, I suppose. If you don't teach children how to think logically, they never learn how as adults. Thanks very much for this post, because it's something we desperately need.
That's because one of the American political parties hates educating the masses and encourages their constituents to be as stupid and easy to lead as possible. The other pretends to care, but benefits from the idiots who look down on "book larnin" so we have one of the biggest jokes of an "education" in the world. Remember, if Sister Bertha Betternyouse gets her religious panties in a bunch, her male overseers will go lobby and bribe to stop schoolchildren from learning basic science/sex ed/ that gay people exist. The fact that "intelligent design" is even a thing shows how pathetic America is.
My point exactly. Americans as a whole are woefully undereducated, and I can't help but think that's on purpose. Once is happenstance, twice is coincidence, three times is conspiracy.. and this has been going on for decades.
This comment is hidden. Click here to view.
Actually your absolutely incredible level of hubris is the only pathetic thing here.
I took logic in college. I was a political science major. [Insert joke here.]
Then you're probably more qualified than most politicians. No joke intended.
I wholeheartedly disagree. Critical thinking starts at a very early age. Now they're grown. Both were a+ student's, ones a much can and the other an artist. My son is the eldest and mucisian..my daughter is 14. IVE NEVRT HAD TO DICIPLINE THEM BUT ONCE EACH.
That's a logical fallacy; specifically the anecdotal evidence fallacy described herein. Your argument is invalid, sorry.
This comment is hidden. Click here to view.
And although you JUST said think logically. Reading these post doesn’t make you think. They’re literally telling you how you should talk to people and all of it is incorrect. Debates exist for a reason. Calling people out on their lies and bullshit is one of the good things. And this is all bullshit.
These may not make you think, but they encourage it. When you can recognize logical fallacies in your own arguments, you understand that you need to dig further. Any list of logical fallacies is not the be-all-end-all but it's a useful tool in the kit.