Sophistry

As a lawyer, it is my job to persuade. There are a lot of methods of doing that. Some of them are legitimate and some are not.

Not many lawyers engage in blatant dishonesty. But there are a lot of ways that an argument can be made without any technical lies, yet the truth is presented in such a way as to give the wrong impression. Things are left out, wrong impressions made, etc. I strive to not be that kind of lawyer.

It backfires, in any case. A sneaky argument might win one battle, but after a while the judge and jury start to realize that they are making decisions based on LESS knowledge, not more. Contradictions start to creep in and a facade of untruth starts to crumble. Bob Bennett points out that a forgery looks worse and worse as time goes on.

This kind of thing is so common on the internet. There are techniques that people employ that make an argument or assertion seem really convincing, but it is actually mostly trickery. I think that I will do a few blog posts on tricks I have seen on the internet and in my profession. 

This week I'll show you what I call, List of Sillies.

It is where someone knows that the other side has a good argument, so they try to trick you into being biased against it by burying it in a list of silly arguments that are attributed to that other person.

So, let's say that Sam and I are having a debate. And I know that Sam has a good argument, so I'll say, "here are the arguments that Sam thinks prove his argument" and then I'll list a bunch of really stupid arguments, attribute them to Sam, and then bury Sam's good argument in the middle somewhere.

Here's another example. Let's say that I was arguing that the earth is flat. In order to make you biased against believing in a round earth, I could make a list of arguments supposedly made by "round earthers." Most of these arguments would be silly and are probably not arguments made by "round earthers" at all. But by making them look silly, I start to bias you against them. Then I slip in one or two of the good arguments that "round earthers" make to associate them with stupid arguments. Then, when you hear those good arguments, you'll dismiss them without even thinking about them. Here is my list of "crazy arguments by round-earthers."

1. Moon looks round, so earth gotta be round, right?
2. The sky is round, so the earth gotta be round too!
3. Crazy astronauts, paid off by the government, claim it's round because they went to "space."
4. Stars spin around the north star, so earth has gotta spin, right?
5. Flat earth is just a conspiracy theory!

You'll notice that I put the "round earther's" strongest arguments in the middle and spoke about it with disdain, using scare-quotes. People arguing that the earth is round probably don't usually make the first, second and fifth arguments. Usually they'll jump to the fact that astronauts have been to space and seen that the earth is round.

So, by using sophistry, I am trying to get you to associate that argument with the other, sillier arguments. I bury it among the silly arguments and then treat it with disdain. Hopefully you'll just dismiss anyone trying to make that argument without actually listening to them.

Can you create your own List of Sillies? Please do and post it in the comments. Also, if you find one on the internet, please share. There are a lot of good ones.

What if Superman Hurt You?

Let's do a thought experiment. Pretend Superman exists.

And he's even better than the movie Superman. He doesn't spend half his time being Clark Kent in an office. No. He's actually working 16- to 20-hour days saving lives and stopping crime.

And he doesn't just stay in Metropolis.  He's flying around the world saving lives and making the world a better place. He has to sleep a little bit though. Even though he's Superman, he still gets tired, especially after a long day. So he gets 4-8 hours of sleep per day.

And the world loves him, of course. Tens of thousands of people owe him their lives. He has hundreds of millions of adoring fans.

Then let's say that you are at the beach enjoying a nice, relaxing summer day. You're there with your family, your kids (or grandkids, if you want). Everything is going well, until you notice that your 3-year-old has wandered into the ocean, got carried away by the tide and is drowning. She's too far away to get to and she's going to die.

But then someone shouts, "Superman, help!" They point to the sky and there's Superman flying by, not far from the beach.

Unbeknownst to you, Superman is coming off of a 48 shift because there was an earthquake in Pakistan. He has saved thousands of lives and he's exhausted.

He looks at your 3 year old daughter.

Then he looks at you, rolls his eyes and flies away.

He's close enough that you can actually see him roll his eyes. It would have taken him just 10 seconds to save her. But he leaves.

She drowns.

How do you feel about Superman?

From a philosophical point of view, is Superman a bad person? Keep in mind that he just spent 48 hours saving people's lives. He could have spent all of that time relaxing at any resort or tropical paradise on earth.

Is he a bad person?

To the parents of that little girl, he's the worst person in the world. Why does he save all those people but not your daughter? You'll hate him for the rest of your life, probably.

I bring this up because I think that this situation is analogous to my church and to potentially all other churches. It is analogous to many other good, charitable organizations and even the government. 

Let's look at the Catholic Church. Everyone knows about the child abuse scandals and the attempted cover-ups that led to more children being put in harm's way. The Catholic church has no excuse for how it handled the situation for many years.

Is the Catholic church evil? In the eyes of the people abused, absolutely.

Does the Catholic church do good? Yes. How many priests and nuns are innocent, good people who have given up everything, including family, to serve God and people? Catholic charities serve the poor in hundreds of places around the world. Priests go into prisons and comfort and teach the prisoners. Nuns teach school for little compensation.

So is the Catholic church good or bad? I would say, "yes."  

If you are going to look for the bad in a person or an institution, then you will find it. If you are looking for the good in a person or institution, you will also find it. The important thing to me in judging, is to see what they are trying to do, most of the time.

As for my church, it spends 99% of its time doing good. But the 1% gets the attention from critics. The critics aren't always wrong about the criticism. But they don't explain the bigger picture (earthquake in Pakistan) and they draw the wrong conclusions. It is akin to saying that Superman is a bad person and shouldn't exist because of the eye-rolling at the beach incident.

Please notice that I am not justifying the eye-rolling incident. It was very wrong of Superman. But he was thinking, "I can't save everyone, I'm trying my best and I need sleep in order to do my best to save more people tomorrow."

That seems like a lame excuse to the parents of the drown girl, but it might have made sense to Superman in the moment.