This article discusses how conspiracy theorists use the ‘argument by example’ technique to support their claims. It explains that presenting examples can convincingly support conclusions but warns that the leap from general occurrences to specific claims can lead to flawed reasoning. For instance, while it is valid to show that conspiracies exist, concluding that a specific conspiracy is true solely based on this evidence is incorrect. The author uses analogies, such as counterfeit art, to illustrate the potential pitfalls of reasoning used in conspiracy theories.
In assessing conspiracy theories, it is crucial to understand that an argument by example can lend both credibility and support, but reasoning must be scrutinized to avoid fallacies.
The argument by example is a persuasive technique in conspiracy theories, shrouded in legitimate reasoning yet leading to potentially flawed conclusions if applied without critical thinking.
Collection
[
|
...
]