"The analogical argument, with its structure of comparing properties, allows conspiracy theorists to draw parallels that can make their claims seem plausible, even if they're incorrect."
"For example, the anti-vaxxer creates an analogy between deceptive vaccine promotion and the opioid crisis, assuming similar government malfeasance, which illustrates a flawed reasoning process."
This essay explores how conspiracy theorists employ analogical arguments, a logical form that establishes similarities between two subjects to draw conclusions. These arguments consist of three premises that compare properties of two items, reaching a conclusion based on shared characteristics. For instance, an anti-vaxxer might compare the governmentâs handling of vaccines to the opioid crisis to suggest a conspiracy. While this reasoning may appear sound, it is often flawed, as exemplified in the misapplication of analogies in supporting unwarranted conspiracy beliefs.
Read at A Philosopher's Blog
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]