Health, wealth, and prosperity fallacy

Question

dominoes7	Health, wealth, and prosperity fallacy There seems to be a fallacy here. Would you please label it for me. I've been searching for weeks trying to figure it out. If you have X, you will get Y. I have X, I didn't get Y. You didn't have enough X. This is particularly prevalent in the faith based movement, or health, wealth, and prosperity gospel. It goes something like this: If you have faith, you will get that car (or house, or spouse). I have faith, but I didn't get my car... You didn't have enough faith.
	asked on Monday, Jun 01, 2015 02:59:40 PM by dominoes7
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	Off the top of my head, it is a version of the No True Scotsman Fallacy. "Don't have enough of" and "not a true" are essentially the same things. For example, If you are a Christian, then you won't murder anyone. Tony is a Christian; he murdered someone. Tony wasn't a real Christian (or Tony wasn't enough of a Christian). Let me think about this to see if there is another named fallacy for this. If not, let's create it :) Friday, Mar 31, 2017 06:51 AM The more generic appeal to purity can be seen when the claim is that someone "does not have enough of" something, which is why they are not meeting the condition. For example, "If you have the desire for success, you will succeed!" Billy has the desire, but is not succeeding. Therefore, Billy's desire is not strong (or pure) enough. The difference between the appeal to purity and the no true Scotsman is one of degree versus authenticity.
	answered on Monday, Jun 01, 2015 03:06:06 PM by Bo Bennett, PhD
Bo Bennett, PhD Suggested These Categories
Comments