when someone denies facts

Would it be a fallacy when someone denies facts like saying the holocaust never happen? Or maybe cognitive dissonance?

Hi, Richard!

Whether or not the person is committing a logical fallacy depends first on whether or not he has given an argument or made an inference. If he has not, then it cannot be the case that he has committed a logical fallacy. And if he as given an argument or made an inference, you'll find out whether it commits a fallacy only through evaluating it---an argument is not fallacious in virtue of the conclusion that the Holocaust did not occur, but in virtue of how that conclusion was reached .

Fallacies aside, if you were asking a question more along the lines of whether a person can be rational in denying a fact like the Holocaust, I can offer an answer to that question as well, if you would like.

Thank you, Richard.

 

From, Kaiden

 

It's just denialism. 

Now that denialism could be applied to a whole host of bad arguments, resulting in many informal fallacies, but you'd need more context.

It's also probably the consequence of one or more cognitive biases, such as  confirmation bias .

I do not see this as a fallacy issue because fallacies deal with errors in the thought process. I see the approach to do this differently. The following is from Boghossian, Peter. "How to Have Impossible Conversations", (p. 24). Hachette Books. Kindle Edition. I recommend anyone who wishes to engage in any discussion with another read his book. 

Your partner understands problems in a way that you don’t currently comprehend.

You say : I’m having a hard time understanding where you’re coming from. I assume you must know some things about this that I don’t. Could you tell me more about where you’re coming from on that so I can understand better?

You say:  What are your hopes for this conversation? What would you like to get out of it?

The more ignorance you admit, the more readily your partner in the conversation will step in with an explanation to help you understand. And the more they attempt to explain, the more likely they are to realize the limits of their own knowledge.

If you ask someone a direct question and they obfuscate or refuse to answer, ask them to ask you the same question.

You say : That’s an interesting perspective. What leads you to conclude that?

Always say: “I’m skeptical, not “I disagree.”

Boghassian uses other techniques: 

“On a scale from 1 to 10, with 1 being no confidence and 10 being absolute confidence, how confident are you that belief is true?”

"I’m not sure how I’d get to where you are, at a X. I want to see what I’m missing. Would you help walk me through it?”

"I am not trying to convince you of anything. I’m curious and would like to ask some questions to learn more."

Instead of people holding a belief because they think they should hold that belief, you claim to hold a belief and wish you could stop believing.

In writing, the mantra is "show don't tell" the reader. The same applies here. If your goal is to change other people's minds, you need to somehow guide them to a different conclusion than the one they currently hold. Then it is their conclusion, not your forcing yours upon them. 

 

Dr Bo...Is there a limit on thumbs up/down within some sort of time frame? or a limit of the total of thumbs up?  I could not add to a +2 and when I thought to test the system, found my +1 would not revert, nor would my -1 .  Just for future reference...

I'm logged in.