ADVICE FOR ANGRY LIBERALS
Describing a form of political argumentation, these words, written in 1824 by Sydney Smith, are still applicable to our contemporary Bush hating liberals.
"Fallacies of Pretended Danger. - Imputations of Bad Design; of Bad Character; of Bad Motives; of Inconsistency; of Suspicious Connections. -         The object of this class of fallacies is to draw aside attention from the measure to the man, and this in such a manner that, for some real or supposed defect in the author of the measure, a corresponding defect shall be imputed to the measure itself. Thus, "the author of the measure entertains a bad design; therefore the measure is bad. His character is bad, therefore the measure is bad; his motive is bad, I will vote against the measure. On former occasions this same person who proposed the measure was its enemy, therefore the measure is bad. He is on footing of intimacy with this or that dangerous man, or has been seen in his company, or is suspected of entertaining some of his opinions, therefore the measure is bad. He bears a name that at a former period was borne by a set of men now no more, by whom bad principles were entertained, therefore the measure is bad!"
        Now, if the measure be really inexpedient, why not at once show it to be so? If the measure be good, is it bad because a bad man is its author? If bad, is it good because a good man has produced it? What are these arguments but to say to the assembly who are to be the judges of any measure, that their imbecility is too great to allow them to judge of the measure by its own merits, and that they must have recourse to distant and feebler probabilities for that purpose?
        "In proportion to the degree of efficiency with which a man suffers these instruments of deception to operate upon his mind, he enables bad men to exercise over him a sort of power, the thought of which ought to cover him with shame. Allow this argument the effect of a conclusive one, you put it into the power of any man to draw you at pleasure from the support of every measure which in your own eyes is good, to force you to give your support to any and every measure which in your own eyes is bad. Is it good? - the bad man embraces it, and by the supposition, you reject it. Is it bad? - he vituperates it, and that suffices for driving you into its embrace. You split upon the rocks because he has avoided them; you miss the harbor because he has steered into it! Give yourself up to any such blind antipathy, you are no less in the power of your adversaries than if, by a correspondently irrational sympathy and obsequiousness, you put yourself into the power of your friends."
Most of this quotation isn't the work of Sydney Smith; rather Smith is quoting from Jeremy Bentham's The Book of Fallacies, from the unfinished papers of Jeremy Bentham, 1824. Bentham is the author of the ideas; Smith wrote the mostly positive critical review.
Posted by: Mark on December 31, 2003 07:56 PMReminds me a little of
The vulgar thus thro’ imitation err,
As oft the learn’d by being singular;
So much they scorn the crowd, that if the throng
By chance go right, they purposely go wrong.
-Alexander Pope, An Essay on Criticism, Part II at www.TheOtherPages.org...
* * *
The 12/29/03 posting “HORSEFEATHERS IS SHOCKED, SHOCKED...” is posted six times in a row (or actually in a column), & none of the six respective comment links work but instead return this message:
An error occurred:
Invalid entry ID '388'
* * *
Is Stephen Rittenberg the same Stephen who posted a comment in the 12/17/03 “REALITY BITES--IN THE ARAB WORLD”?
* * *
Happy new year!
Posted by: ForNow on January 1, 2004 12:46 PM