Question

...
Matthew

Is this affirming the consequent?

I was recently arguing with someone about the false equivalency between homosexual and heterosexual slurs. The person claimed that because he, as a straight man would not get offended if someone tried to insult him for being straight, that must mean that the homosexual slurs are just as inconsequential. I pointed out how historical and social realities make them different but I didn't accept his condition of getting offended and sounded a bit like he was saying

1).if homosexual& heterosexual slurs were the same, then you should not get offended.
2). you did not get offended
3). therefore, homosexual& heterosexual slurs are the same

Would this be an example of affirming the consequent? Thank you
asked on Friday, Jun 07, 2019 02:30:56 PM by Matthew

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."

Uncomfortable Ideas: Facts don't care about feelings. Science isn't concerned about sensibilities. And reality couldn't care less about rage.

This is a book about uncomfortable ideas—the reasons we avoid them, the reasons we shouldn’t, and discussion of dozens of examples that might infuriate you, offend you, or at least make you uncomfortable.

Many of our ideas about the world are based more on feelings than facts, sensibilities than science, and rage than reality. We gravitate toward ideas that make us feel comfortable in areas such as religion, politics, philosophy, social justice, love and sex, humanity, and morality. We avoid ideas that make us feel uncomfortable. This avoidance is a largely unconscious process that affects our judgment and gets in the way of our ability to reach rational and reasonable conclusions. By understanding how our mind works in this area, we can start embracing uncomfortable ideas and be better informed, be more understanding of others, and make better decisions in all areas of life.

Get 20% off this book and all Bo's books*. Use the promotion code: websiteusers

* This is for the author's bookstore only. Applies to autographed hardcover, audiobook, and ebook.

Get the Book

Answers

...
Bo Bennett, PhD
0
The form of affirming the consequent is:

If P then Q.
Q.
Therefore, P.

Your argument is:

1) If homosexual & heterosexual slurs were the same (P), then you should not get offended (Q).
2) You did not get offended (Q).
3) Therefore, homosexual & heterosexual slurs are the same (P).

It's a bingo! But is your formulation of his argument accurate? You said

The person claimed that because he, as a straight man would not get offended if someone tried to insult him for being straight, that must mean that the homosexual slurs are just as inconsequential.



1) "Straight insults" to a straight man are inconsequential (e.g., "You like boobies! ha ha!").
2) "Straight insults" are of the same significance as "homosexual slurs." (implied premise)
3) Therefore, homosexual slurs are also inconsequential.

This might be a more accurate formulation of what he is arguing*. As you can see, there is a major problem with premise #2 and therefore, the conclusion does not follow. This is not fallacious; just a bad (unsound) argument.

* The fact is, we should be asking the person if this is what they meant. The person could have very well mean exactly how you presented the formalized argument.
answered on Friday, Jun 07, 2019 04:07:12 PM by Bo Bennett, PhD

Comments