 |
| Powerhouse theatre |
PIRIE, MADSEN (2006)(2015) How To Win Every Argument, Bloomsbury, London.
This fallacy discredits the opposition before they have stated a single word. (163). At its crudest form it consists in making unpleasant comments about intellectual opposition. (163).
Pirie explains as example (163) that if a person states that everyone other than an idiot can reason that not enough money is spent on education, this person poisons the well for someone that suggests enough money is spent on education.
Canada 150th Anniversary fallacy, examples
American: A nation that does not hold to a republic, in our case, a constitutional federal republic as a form of government, is a nation of idiots!
Canadian: We do not hold to a republic, as a form of government, we hold to a federal parliamentary democracy under a constitutional monarchy.
British: We do not hold to a republic, as a form of government, we hold to a parliamentary constitutional monarchy.
---
I am not an expert on political science. But from intellectuals and academics I have heard and read, there are opinions that the American political system is superior for maintaining freedom and democracy, while others reason a British (Canada included) parliamentary system provides more freedom and democracy. It is difficult to measure in many cases.
I do not claim to know the answer, definitively and definitely, but it seems to me that often the nature of laws passed within those systems and societies and how they are regulated will have more to do with the level of freedom and democracy, than the technical systems used.
The levels of freedom of religion, for example, would largely depend on how a constitution, if there is one, is interpreted, and the laws sanctioned by governments and societies within a system.
A constitution, as in the United States of America or Canada, is not a guarantee of greater religious freedom.
---
Canadian: Any nation that does not have hockey as its favourite sport, is a nation of idiots!
American: Our favourite sport is football (National Football League).
British: Our favourite sport is football, real football, not what the Americans call football.
---
I reason this fallacy uses ad hominem attacks (against the person). Logically fallacious agrees:
Logically fallacious
'Poisoning the Well (also known as: discrediting, smear tactics)
Description: To commit a preemptive ad hominem attack against an opponent. That is, to prime the audience with adverse information about the opponent from the start, in an attempt to make your claim more acceptable or discount the credibility of your opponent’s claim.
Logical Form: Adverse information (be it true or false) about person 1 is presented. Therefore, the claim(s) of person 1 will be false.'
