Definition of Argument By Selective Reading
Argument by Selective Reading, also known as Cherry Picking, is a logical fallacy where a person presents a case by only providing evidence that supports their argument while deliberately ignoring or dismissing any data or information that contradicts or undermines their position. This fallacy is a form of biased reasoning, as it involves the manipulation or misrepresentation of information to mislead or persuade. It is considered a fallacy because it offers an incomplete and unbalanced view of the evidence, leading to potentially false or misleading conclusions. The person committing this fallacy may either be aware of the contrary evidence and choose to ignore it, or they may unconsciously select only the evidence that supports their views due to cognitive biases. This fallacy can occur in any field where arguments are made and evidence is used to support those arguments, including politics, law, science, and everyday decision-making.
In Depth Explanation
The Argument by Selective Reading, also known as Cherry-Picking, is a logical fallacy that occurs when someone selectively presents or focuses on evidence that supports their viewpoint, while ignoring or downplaying evidence that contradicts it. This fallacy is a form of biased reasoning, as it involves a deliberate attempt to misrepresent the full range of evidence on a particular issue.
To understand the mechanics of this fallacy, let's imagine a hypothetical scenario. Suppose we have two debaters, Alice and Bob, who are arguing about whether apples are beneficial for health. Alice, who believes that apples are beneficial, only presents studies that show the positive effects of apples on health, such as their high fiber content and antioxidant properties. Meanwhile, she completely ignores or dismisses studies that highlight potential negative effects, such as the high sugar content in apples. This is an example of Argument by Selective Reading.
The logical structure of this fallacy involves two main steps. First, the person committing the fallacy selectively reads or presents evidence, focusing only on the information that supports their viewpoint. Second, they ignore or downplay any evidence that contradicts their viewpoint. This results in a skewed presentation of the evidence, which can mislead others into believing that the evidence overwhelmingly supports the person's viewpoint.
In abstract reasoning, this fallacy can manifest in various ways. For instance, someone might selectively cite statistics that support their argument, while ignoring statistics that contradict it. Or, they might selectively interpret a theory or concept in a way that supports their viewpoint, while ignoring other interpretations that contradict it.
The Argument by Selective Reading can have significant impacts on rational discourse. It can distort the truth, mislead others, and prevent a fair and balanced discussion of the issue at hand. Moreover, it can create a false impression of consensus or certainty, when in fact the evidence on the issue is mixed or inconclusive.
In conclusion, the Argument by Selective Reading is a logical fallacy that involves selectively presenting or focusing on evidence that supports one's viewpoint, while ignoring or downplaying contradictory evidence. It is a form of biased reasoning that can distort the truth, mislead others, and hinder rational discourse. To avoid this fallacy, it's important to consider all relevant evidence on an issue, not just the evidence that supports our preconceived beliefs or desires.
Real World Examples
1. Health and Diet: A person reads an article about the health benefits of drinking red wine, which includes potential heart health benefits and antioxidants. They then advocate for daily consumption of red wine, ignoring the parts of the article that mention the risks of alcohol consumption, such as liver disease, addiction, and increased risk of certain cancers. This is an example of argument by selective reading, as the person is only focusing on the information that supports their desire to drink red wine daily, while ignoring the potential risks.
2. Politics: During a political campaign, a candidate selectively quotes from their opponent's speech to make it seem like they support a controversial policy. They ignore the context and the rest of the speech where the opponent clarified their stance and provided a balanced view. This is a common example of argument by selective reading, where one selectively picks information to misrepresent the opponent's position.
3. History: A student is writing a paper about the causes of World War II. They only include sources that blame one country for starting the war, ignoring the many other sources that discuss the complex interplay of economic, political, and social factors that led to the outbreak of the war. This is an example of argument by selective reading, as the student is only including information that supports their preconceived notion, while ignoring the broader historical context.
Countermeasures
Counteracting Argument by Selective Reading requires a multi-faceted approach.
Firstly, encourage comprehensive reading. This means promoting the reading of entire documents, articles, or studies, rather than cherry-picking sections that support a preconceived notion. This can be achieved by fostering an environment where thoroughness is valued over quick conclusions.
Secondly, promote critical thinking. Encourage individuals to question the information they consume, to look for potential biases, and to consider alternative interpretations. This can be done through education and training, or by creating a culture that values intellectual curiosity and skepticism.
Thirdly, emphasize the importance of context. Understanding the broader context in which a statement or piece of information exists can help to prevent selective reading. This can be achieved by encouraging individuals to consider the author's intent, the intended audience, and the circumstances in which the information was produced.
Fourthly, encourage diversity of sources. Relying on a single source of information can lead to selective reading, as it may only present one perspective. Encourage individuals to seek out multiple sources of information, and to consider different viewpoints.
Lastly, promote transparency and honesty. Encourage individuals to be open about their sources, their methods of interpretation, and any potential biases they may have. This can help to prevent selective reading by making it clear when information has been selectively chosen or interpreted.
In conclusion, counteracting Argument by Selective Reading requires a combination of comprehensive reading, critical thinking, understanding of context, diversity of sources, and transparency. By promoting these values, we can help to prevent selective reading and foster a more accurate and nuanced understanding of information.
Thought Provoking Questions
1. Can you recall a time when you only considered evidence that supported your view on a particular topic, while consciously or unconsciously ignoring any contradicting evidence? How might this have affected the validity of your conclusion?
2. How often do you actively seek out and consider opposing viewpoints or evidence when forming your own beliefs or arguments? If not often, how might this selective reading impact the accuracy and balance of your understanding?
3. In what ways might your personal biases influence your selective reading or cherry-picking of information? How can you work towards acknowledging and mitigating these biases to ensure a more comprehensive understanding of a subject?
4. Can you identify any instances in politics, law, science, or everyday decision-making where you have witnessed the use of the Argument by Selective Reading fallacy? How did it affect the credibility of the argument and your perception of the person making it?