View Single Post
Old 9th September 2018, 10:19 PM   #310
Graduate Poster
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 1,509
Bellwether Fallacy

Fred Bost, Jerry Allen Potter, Ted Gunderson, Jeffrey Elliott, and Errol Morris have all put forth a conspiracy narrative involving the CID, FBI, and DOJ. This cognitive process is known as the Bellwether Fallacy, a common pattern of argumentation in conspiracy theories. Most conspiracy theories are, to a large extent, theories of history. That is, history tells us that something happened, but a conspiracy theory says that some other (typically poorly defined) events unfolded instead to give us that evidence.

Specifically, that something else happened instead and the evidence we have in hand is either selectively considered or has been manufactured by nefarious forces in order to keep us in the dark, lead us astray, and prevent us from determining what "really" happened. As such there are always inconsistencies and anomalies in the data. Historical events never leave antiseptic data sets that point inexorably toward a single conclusion to the exclusion of all contemplated or speculated alternatives.

Hence historical lines of reasoning talk about preponderances of evidence. And so when we dispute a conspiracy theory, we point back to the preponderance -- the totality of available evidence that en masse suggests a particular cause. The essence of the Bellwether Fallacy is that one bit of evidence is made inappropriately to represent the entire question -- to become a bellwether, in essence, for a larger evidentiary picture. If the bellwether proposition can be refuted or upheld, then allegedly so goes the whole question, and the rest of the evidence is just expected to sort itself out somehow to match that direction.

Last edited by JTF; 9th September 2018 at 10:32 PM.
JTF is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top