Question

...
Jason Mathias

Are there any fallacies in this internet meme?

“IF THIS WAS A REAL PANDEMIC THEY WOULDN’T BE FIRING EXPERIENCED HEALTHCARE WORKERS FOR THEIR REFUSAL TO TAKE THE JAB.” 

asked on Thursday, Sep 09, 2021 02:25:59 PM by Jason Mathias

Top Categories Suggested by Community

Comments

Want to get notified of all questions as they are asked? Update your mail preferences and turn on "Instant Notification."

Master the "Rules of Reason" for Making and Evaluating Claims

Claims are constantly being made, many of which are confusing, ambiguous, too general to be of value, exaggerated, unfalsifiable, and suggest a dichotomy when no such dichotomy exists. Good critical thinking requires a thorough understanding of the claim before attempting to determine its veracity. Good communication requires the ability to make clear, precise, explicit claims, or “strong” claims. The rules of reason in this book provide the framework for obtaining this understanding and ability.

This book / online course is about the the eleven rules of reason for making and evaluating claims. Each covered in detail in the book. 

Take the Online Course

Answers

...
Bo Bennett, PhD
6

This appears to be an unsupported claim rather than an argument. If it were fitted into an argument, we might have a false premise or at least a premise that is unsupported.

p1. In real pandemics, every single healthcare worker would take the vaccine created to end the pandemic.

p2. Every single healthcare worker is not taking the vaccine.

C. Therefore, this isn't a real pandemic.

answered on Thursday, Sep 09, 2021 02:31:57 PM by Bo Bennett, PhD

Bo Bennett, PhD Suggested These Categories

Comments
...
1
Jason Mathias writes:

I think is what the meme is saying is why would they fire healthcare workers when they need as many healthcare workers as possible during a real pandemic. Could it be a non sequitur?

posted on Thursday, Sep 09, 2021 02:44:04 PM
...
1
Bo Bennett, PhD writes:
[To Jason Mathias ]

Yeah, same problems. Unsupported claims. Depending how the argument is worded, it might be non sequitur .

[ login to reply ] posted on Thursday, Sep 09, 2021 02:45:27 PM
...
0
Jason Mathias writes:

Yeah, I think it could be a non sequitur since the conclusion does not follow. I would think the opposite, I would think that its important for those caring for sick and dying people in the hospital during a pandemic to be protected and protect their patients by having to be vaccinated. 

posted on Thursday, Sep 09, 2021 03:10:17 PM
...
TrappedPrior (RotE)
1

This isn't an argument; the claim needs buttressing though. It's suggesting that, if the pandemic were such an emergency, then the healthcare system would need all the help it can get - and you certainly don't start by firing essential, experienced workers for refusing get vaccinated when you need all the help you can get...

...or do you? Well, you might, if you consider those workers to be a risk to the patients they're caring for. While vaccination isn't perfect, it's demonstrably cut transmission rates (yes, including the Super Mega Death variants the media talks about, even if by considerably less) as well as reducing hospitalisation and fatalities. If frontline workers choose not to take a vaccine, they're more likely to spread infection to others. Thus, it makes sense to drop people who are presenting this risk to patients.

That is, from one point of view. But as the above entails, the statement requires support.

answered on Thursday, Sep 09, 2021 03:35:32 PM by TrappedPrior (RotE)

TrappedPrior (RotE) Suggested These Categories

Comments