Un-Notable Effort
Historical archive only. New interaction is disabled.
Original Question
Often when presented with contradictory evidence or examples, people will use unfalsifiable handwaves to explain away the specific counter-cases brought against them, without actually saying anything meaningful.
*picture a school assembly hall*
Dr Do-It: Friends, the fact of the matter is we live in a society of negativity and naysayers. People who will talk you down, talk themselves down, and bring down the chances of everybody around them. But that's completely backward. There's more opportunity out there than ever before! Anyone can become a successful - the next Bill Gates, Jeff Bezos, or Steve Jobs - you just gotta believe!
Cassandra: Um...Dr Do-It...what does that actually mean? Can I...believe my dreams into existence?
Dr Do-It: Well, believing is the first step my girl. You see, you gotta put that belief in action, to make that dream a reality. Think about Gates, Bezos and Jobs. They all believed, they all started businesses, and look where it took them!
Cassandra: Not everyone can afford to start start businesses, Dr Do-It, it's very expensive and hard to get loans. And most people who do aren't successful; most startups fail despite taking your advice. So what's up?
*awkward silence. Cassandra's teachers move to the front, preparing to eject her for asking too many questions and embarrassing the guest speaker*
Dr Do-It: Because they didn't try hard enough. If you try hard enough, you'll make it! It's not about how many times you get down, it's about how many times you can get up again!
Cassandra has clearly argued Dr Do-It into a corner here with relevant counterpoints, but he uses a handwave - "they didn't try hard enough" - to explain away her dissent. Christians often do this when told faith healing is useless (which it is), by saying the deceased "didn't have enough faith".
Comments on Question
Answers
1Ultimately, this is an issue with Unfalsifiability . It might also qualify as a Self-Sealing Argument . In both cases, it is a very weak claim (the subject of my book that I will be announcing shortly!).
Master Logical Fallacies Online
Take the Virversity course and sharpen your reasoning skills with structured lessons.
View Online Course
I think this situation is evocative of the underlying Christian ethos in America that lack of success indicates God's disfavour or laziness.
Poverty was widely judged as being a moral failing until at least the end of the nineteenth century. Underlying the popular notion of success is Deuteronomist theology which suggests that failure is a corollary of idleness, which translates these days into being seduced by the temptation of government assistance.
This biblical precedent served the vested interests of the church and the privileged for centuries. The obscenely wealthy church could say 'We're wealthy because god deems it, while the rich could say 'If you're not successful, you have nobody to blame but yourself.'