Experiment Laboratory and bad Argument The human belief system had been majorly influenced by several false and unrelated arguments that are meant tobuild up our value system. Most of the illogical arguments are more pronounced in the political parlance. Most of the debates surrounding their arguments are channelled towards the aim of eliminating opposition. Nevertheless, critically analysing the intent of such debates, one would realize that most of the claims and argument are illogical.
In the book, The Duck that Won the Lottery by Julian Baggini, several arguments is included in the book, which exposes several illogical claims and arguments such as the straw man fallacy (beginning 2009). The straw man fallacy is a fallacy that is common in the political parlance. It is used to attack political opponents without having a physical contact but leaving the opponents in a disjointed state. The straw man fallacy enables an individual to set an imaginary target, assault it and have a self-adjudged victory. This argument could be linked to the American attack on Iraq under the Bush administration.
The President Bush led administration invaded Iraq on the basis of the possession of nuclear weapons by the then dictator, Saddam Hussein and his connection with Osama Bin Laden and the September 11 attack on the world trade centre. The public was made to believe that Saddam was in possession of a nuclear weapon and have a connection with the Al Qaeda leader. The argument seems illogical to believe, since there was no evidence that could link the two personalities together.
From the argument, one would think that, the Iraqi President is the point of target for the attack. The main target is the American public. The public at that point felt that the
American President was losing his influence in the global world. This notion among the public was influenced by the quiet nature of the Clinton administration. The American public in this argument represents the straw man. The imaginary picture created is the Iraqi President that was used as a means to gain public acceptance. The second argument is to falsify the initial claim that the public was the centre of attention, while carrying out attacks in Iraq. This is a target that, the Bush dynasty had been after over the years. The Senior Bush in the early twentieth century had a row with Saddam and he could not get hold of him. This is one of the reasons that, President Bush had put up an illogical argument to invade Iraq and satisfy his thirst for war.
An argument that could also be used in explaining that type of fallacy is that of a psychological illustration in treating a patient. Psychologist believes in the recreation of an atmosphere that makes a patient recall event that had happened in the past in order to proffer a solution to the present. This argument is mostly given in the event of forensic investigation. This argument could be termed as illogical, because the possibility of a patient going back to his past most especially in movies is irrational. Substituting a patient’s mind represents the highest state of delusion. What if the only experience that comes to his mind is sweet and does not pertain to the present condition, decisions are then made based on mere illusion.
The laboratory experiment represents a philosophical argument for which one is expected to illustrate a scenario whereby a notion is presented to generalize on a group. For example, in the European context, anyone associated with the Islam religion is said to be a terrorist because of the event of the September 11 attack on the world trade centre. Since then anyone entering into any European country with a Muslim name would be considered as a potential terrorist. This claim could be faulted by the consequent emergence of the American President with an Islamic background. To this end, the laboratory experiment could be faulted as irrelevant in generalizing on the entire Islam community.
Baginni, J 2009, The Duck that Won the Lottery: 100 New Experiment for the Armchair
Philosopher, Plume Publishers, London.