Is this an example of a beard fallacy?
Historical archive only. New interaction is disabled.
Original Question
Particulars of the case:
1. On Monday, 4/20/2015, Washington DC Police Chief Cathy Lanier was caught, via cellphone video, to be using a parking space for reserved for the handicapped.
2. Police Chief Lanier is not handicapped
3. Washington DC has laws against those who are not handicapped who use parking spaces reserved for the handicapped
4. Washington DC Mayor Muriel Bowser was asked if Police Chief Lanier broke the law
5. DC Mayor Bowser said that the police chief did break the law
6. But DC Mayor Bowser also said, "I don't know one person who would be overly concerned about one incident."
7. The Washington DC Police is notorious for handing out parking tickets and illegal parking tickets--even for "one time incidents."
Here's a link to the story ---> dailycaller.com/2015/04/2. . .
Question: Is Bowser using the beard fallacy to clear Lanier?
1. On Monday, 4/20/2015, Washington DC Police Chief Cathy Lanier was caught, via cellphone video, to be using a parking space for reserved for the handicapped.
2. Police Chief Lanier is not handicapped
3. Washington DC has laws against those who are not handicapped who use parking spaces reserved for the handicapped
4. Washington DC Mayor Muriel Bowser was asked if Police Chief Lanier broke the law
5. DC Mayor Bowser said that the police chief did break the law
6. But DC Mayor Bowser also said, "I don't know one person who would be overly concerned about one incident."
7. The Washington DC Police is notorious for handing out parking tickets and illegal parking tickets--even for "one time incidents."
Here's a link to the story ---> dailycaller.com/2015/04/2. . .
Question: Is Bowser using the beard fallacy to clear Lanier?
Answers
1Hi Ben!
I don't think this is a good Argument of the Beard. The real problem here is on point #6 where the mayor appears to brush off the violation by claiming that he doesn't know "one person who would be overly concerned about one incident." His ignorance does not mean that there aren't people who are concerned out there, but more importantly should be concerned. There is an implied "ought" (nobody ought to be concerned) here based on the assumed "is" (nobody is concerned). This is best expressed by the Naturalistic Fallacy .
Master Logical Fallacies Online
Take the Virversity course and sharpen your reasoning skills with structured lessons.
View Online Course