Covid Concerns: Fallacies or strong argument?
Historical archive only. New interaction is disabled.
Original Question
Here is an argument of mind I recently presented to my local member of parliament with some stuff edited out for privacy reasons:
I am writing to ask if we can have stricter mitigations in place so as to reduce the risks of people getting infected by those that either refuse a vaccine and/or refuse to wear a face covering. I will be going back to work soon and I am concerned that some colleagues will refuse a vaccine for wild reasons that lack any evidential basis. What I propose in this situation is that it become mandatory that they provide a regular negative lateral flow test.
As for face coverings, our new company policy states that if you are exempt, you can wear a face visor. However, as several scientists have pointed out during this pandemic face visors do absolutely nothing to reduce the spread of covid. And I fear that some of my colleagues may use this new policy to only wear a face visor despite the fact that they managed to wear face masks with no trouble throughout last year. If they do this, they are significantly putting people at risk like myself who has a long-term health condition as well as the people I live with who also have long-term health conditions.
Furthermore, we are based in a fairly small working environment making social distancing difficult. It is, therefore, even more, imperative that face coverings are worn.
Moreover, if a person is so vulnerable that they cannot wear a face mask then it stands to reason that they should be shielding as much as reasonably possible anyway. The exemption of face coverings acts as a loophole that has and will continue to be abused by those that simply just don't want to wear one. If we want covid reduced as much as and as quickly as possible, and the avoidance of another lockdown, etc then this is where strict mitigation is needed.
To conclude, I propose making it mandatory that those that refuse vaccinations provide regular negative lateral flow tests, face visors being deemed unsuitable for reduction of covid risk, and that face masks continue to be worn at all times in working environments where social distancing is proving difficult.
Comments on Question
Answers
4I would not call it a Fallacy. More like voicing a concern and suggesting a solution. As far as whether mask works or if some people are more vulnerable to covid require fact checking.
There is an innumerable amount of fallacies that have constantly been repeated throughout this whole "Pandemic"; I'll list a few if you are interested at all in logic ... but ... odds are you will repeat the same errors in the rejection of this reply.
1) Appeal to Authority - You act as if there has any amount of actual science done here when the record indicates that no testing has been done to even isolate this "virus" to approach a scientific demonstration of this conclusion without any proof.
2) Appeal to Common Belief - As noted above you believe what the "experts" have said although other experts just as qualified have appealed to the real scientific method and yet are ignored - because they do not carry the clout that the others have.
3) Appeal to Consequences - It's amazing to me that Government types makes these horrific errors in logic and then expect everyone to comply merely because they say the sky is falling. I would appeal to your basic job: to protect those rights established by ancestors that had to fight to the death just to get them. To make mandatory one thing by deserting your basic responsibility of upholding that which would be denied by such a mandate is the most illogical and the most consequential of all. I doubt anyone elected you (if such things as elections really exist) to be represented by you to be their Master of their bodies.
I could go on and on and on but I doubt seriously if you're capable of dealing with it.
This looks good to me, logically speaking. I didn't bother with fact-checking claims/assumptions (I assume you did that legwork).
As with all conclusions, check your premises. You have assumed the premise that face masks work is correct. I see that as the weakest element in your discussion and, therefore, the easiest to attack.
Master Logical Fallacies Online
Take the Virversity course and sharpen your reasoning skills with structured lessons.
View Online Course
I feel this post is inappropriate here in a forum devoted to reason and logic. The subject matter itself is n dispute, and highly-politicized at this stage. Although I detect in a cursory reading many instances of inherent bias in this post, I find that irrelevant. Questions posted here should be concise, performed with brevity and clarity, and focused on the topic of LOGIC. This post is far too lengthy, not particularly well written, and seemingly advances the writer's POV on this issue. There are forums online which address COVID, and this loosely spun diatribe would be better housed there.