From: Blunderov (squooker@mweb.co.za)
Date: Mon Sep 29 2003 - 11:58:00 MDT
I think there is a difference between ad populem (everybody says so) and
'peer review' which is an accepted part, as I understand, of the
scientific method. Of course peer review does not guarantee a 'correct'
opinion, but it does seem probable that any such opinion will at least
be based on the best available information on any given subject.
We will often have to trust in the best efforts of experts in a field,
and then compare them to each other, in order to derive our own
conclusions - it simply is not possible to read everything.
I read once that a physician-specialist, for instance, would have to
spend eight hours a day reading in order to just remain current in his
specialty. In an ideal universe everyone would read everything, but
given that this is impossible we will probably have to accept the peer
review process as being the best we can do.
One of the most important things we CAN do however is to sharpen and
maintain our ability to reason. In this way we can gain the most benefit
from that which we do have the time to read. Also it will give us a
criterion for deciding what it is not necessary or rewarding to read.
The debate between Jonathan and the Hermit was interesting to me not so
much because of the subject (about which I know next to nothing) but
because of their, mostly, adherence to the formal methodology of
argument. This was educational for me and, I imagine, other Virians.
It could have been, IMHO, even more educational from a specifically
Varian point of view had they more resolutely couched their value
judgments in terms of Scruton's conformity, or lack thereof, to the
Virian ideals.(Not that they made no attempt to do so, but it did seem
to become a bit diffused from time to time.)
Best Regards
Blunderov
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-virus@lucifer.com [mailto:owner-virus@lucifer.com] On
Behalf
> Of Kalkor
> Sent: 29 September 2003 1849
> To: virus@lucifer.com
> Subject: virus: Studying Ad Populem, was: ideohazard 1.1
>
> [Kalkor]
> Massive amounts of the thread snipped, to focus on one recurring point
I
> keep seeing. Since we're in the hobby of studying memetics, I thought
we'd
> study this one logical fallacy a bit as it doesn't seem to get much
> attention but is USED a lot in, for instance, advertising. Ad Populem.
>
> Below I have quoted Hermit during this exchange. I would like to state
> that
> the quotes were chosen by scanning through quickly until I found some
> keywords. The object of this post is not to attack anyone, but to
discuss
> the finer points of peer review versus the Ad Populem fallacy.
>
> The Ad Populem fallacy states that it is fallacious in argument to say
> something like "everyone else agrees with him so you should too". So
what
> about saying something like "accepted approvingly only by people
infested
> with a similar political ideology. His work is not regarded as
exceptional
> by any significant academic group and his character is viewed as
flawed."
>
> Is this, too, an example of the Ad Populem fallacy? Does Ad Populem
> necessarily have to do with claiming the support of the crowd? How
about
> claiming the disdain of the crowd?
>
> [Hermit 6] A slew of fallacies, from ad populam (claiming support of
the
> crowd) to ad hominem.
>
> [Hermit 4] It is not at all irrelevant. Neither was it poisoning the
well.
> The man takes short cuts in all directions and uses his spurious
> "authority"
> to make a never ending stream of assertions accepted approvingly only
by
> people infested with a similar political ideology. His work is not
> regarded
> as exceptional by any significant academic group and his character is
> viewed
> as flawed. The mention of his history suffices to prove that this is
> neither
> a stretch nor a new phenomenon. In science at least, but in academia
> generally in my experience, reputation is jealously guarded, because
you
> have only one. Scruton has one, but it smells a bit like last week's
hake.
>
> ---
> To unsubscribe from the Virus list go to <http://www.lucifer.com/cgi-
> bin/virus-l>
--- To unsubscribe from the Virus list go to <http://www.lucifer.com/cgi-bin/virus-l>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon Sep 29 2003 - 11:58:40 MDT