Question

...
Dean

Death by Citation Request

I'm not sure if this is a logical fallacy but it's commonly used in arguments, especially on the internet. The interlocutor questions the validity of a claim and insists on evidence or a citation for a claim that is either commonly known or that can be easily found by a Google or Wikipedia search.

Example: The sky is blue because blue colors are scattered more in the atmosphere than other colors.

Interlocutor: Citation?

 

asked on Sunday, Jan 02, 2022 10:02:17 AM by Dean

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
7

I wonder if a couple if different things are going on here.

1) Requesting a citation is not at all fallacious, especially when one rattles off statistics or incredulous data. In this case, asking for a citation is the reasonable thing to do.

2) Requesting a citation for a well-known fact perhaps makes the person asking look foolish, but still no fallacy. We could see this as a red herring if they refuse to continue with the argument if no citation can be provided (when none should be expected, like with your blue sky example).

3) Requesting a citation for information that is not something that would be in a research paper also makes the person asking look foolish, or at least ignorant in the area. For example, scientific or professional opinions that are a result of decades of study/experience (e.g., "you need to bend your knees and extend the moment before you hit the jump"). Again, no fallacy, just an odd question.

Overall, I think the red herring might fit, but only if the interlocutor's behavior suggests it. For example, if they have been proven wrong and this is their last-ditch-effort to avoid conceding.
answered on Sunday, Jan 02, 2022 10:17:06 AM by Bo Bennett, PhD

Bo Bennett, PhD Suggested These Categories

Comments
...
0
Dean writes:

Thanks for the reply. Yes, I have no problem with citations, which I why I tend to go overboard on them when I'm breaking new ground.

But I find that many internet responders' first response is to demand a citation instead of taking a few minutes to find the widely-available answer.

So, I think your suggestion that it is a red herring or something like that is a useful category.

posted on Sunday, Jan 02, 2022 10:41:00 AM
...
3
TrappedPrior (RotE) writes:
[To Dean]

Yeah, I'm sure we all know a person like that. "Oh, got any evidence? Got a citation?" even for mundane claims which should be self-evident or basic.

In some cases, logic chopping might count.

[ login to reply ] posted on Monday, Jan 03, 2022 12:52:14 AM
...
1
Dean writes:

Thanks! That's an excellent observation.

posted on Monday, Jan 03, 2022 01:33:32 AM
...
1
Dean writes:

LOL, I just read the full description of logic chopping here and loved this part of the definition:

"Pay close attention to this fallacy, because after reading this book, you may find yourself committing this fallacy more than any others, and certainly more often than you did before reading this book."

posted on Monday, Jan 03, 2022 01:35:37 AM
...
1
TrappedPrior (RotE) writes:
[To Dean]

Oh definitely. When you learn logic and fallacies, the temptation is to apply your newfound knowledge to everything - and it feels good inside, to "dunk" on people by picking apart their statements - even basic ones.

The problem is that:

1) you are likely to miss the point

2) you could commit the argument from fallacy 

3) you'll piss people off

I use them more as a self-teaching tool. If I read an opinion piece or see a politician make a claim, I might analyse it and see one or more logical errors. Being able to identify them strengthens my reasoning skills. Being able to name them helps keep my criticism organised and on-point.

Of course, the tools of logic are best applied closer to home - to reflect upon your own beliefs and sharpen any arguments for those (or discarding the ones that don't stand up to scrutiny).

[ login to reply ] posted on Monday, Jan 03, 2022 08:09:35 PM
...
0
Dean writes:

Thanks for pointing out Argument from Fallacy. I will have to watch out for that!

I am studying logical fallacies because in my own field of research, and especially in its popularization, certain logical fallacies lead to crucial misunderstandings. Pointing out the fallacies helps to clarify what the real issues are.

 

posted on Monday, Jan 03, 2022 08:15:25 PM