Evidence Evolution

The way people are able to be convinced to some things has often bugged me. Even though I know about the tricks that are used, I fall for them just as often as the next guy. A pretty prominent strategy is anecdotal evidence. An anecdote is a short story meant to appeal to the emotion of the reader or listener. The problem is that a story is only a single point of data, a datum. Such a small sampling space is hardly evidence that should bring someone to action, but all the same, human nature being what it is, our emotions take control and we're convinced.

A fallacy that occurs far too often on the internet is the ad hominem. An ad hominem is an attack on the character of the speaker rather than on the speaker's arguments themselves. The thing is, an argument can be valid independent of the fact that the person that's saying it has reasons to be disliked. On the internet, people tend to attack each other due to the anonymity that is perceived. Good name doesn't appear to hold any value unless you're a well known user of a forum or something of that nature, and even that name doesn't tend to be tied to the real identity of the person.

Another fallacy that I hear quite often is the slippery slope. I like to think of it as the "If you give a mouse a cookie..." fallacy. It goes something like this: If you do W, then X, Y, and Z will happen. Therefore, W should not be done. The fact of the matter is that the world does not automatically slide out of control in a direction. Sure, a president for W will be set, but that may not lead to anything further. Usually the slippery slope fallacy blows the repercussions of a decision far out of proportion.

This last fallacy is my favorite to use, the non sequitur. Literally, it means "it does not follow." A non sequitur is used to change the subject when an argument isn't going the direction that is desired. I wouldn't even bring it up, but I find it strange that many people often miss that the subject is being changed. They realize it on some level, of course, because the dialogue continues, but the fact that the direction has completely changed course isn't as striking. I'm a bit curious what part of the brain is missing the change and why.