The Secret Worldwide Transit Cabal |
|
Informed but opinionated commentary and analysis on urban transportation topics from the Secret Worldwide Transit Cabal. Names have been omitted to protect the guilty. Our Mission: Monkeywrench the Anti-Transit Forces
Archives
E-mail: transitcabal -AT- gmail.com (EDIT before sending!) Please report dead links News Sources www.planetizen.com www.lightrail.com www.lightrailnow.org www.funimag.com. Funicular RRs Skepticism/Baloney Detecton Practical Skepticism Site The Fine Art of Baloney Detection (Carl Sagan) www.spinsanity.org Pro-Transit Sites Victoria Transportation Policy Institute Vitriolic Critic of American "Urbanism": www.kunstler.com Protransit Site in Cincinnati Protransit Site in Toronto SeattleMonoJabsAll.pdf Critics / Anti-Transit Sites Prime Transit Disinfo: www.rppi.org Wendell Cox's Website Randal O'Toole: www.ti.org/antiplanner |
Monday, August 26, 2002
Carl Sagan's Baloney Detection Kit From the Cabalmaster: Carl Sagan's Baloney Detection Kit From www.carlsagan.com Baloney Detection Kit ---------------------------------------------- Warning signs that suggest deception. Based on the book by Carl Sagan The Demon Haunted World. The following are suggested as tools for testing arguments and detecting fallacious or fraudulent arguments: Wherever possible there must be independent confirmation of the facts. Encourage substantive debate on the evidence by knowledgeable proponents of all points of view. Arguments from authority carry little weight (in science there are no "authorities"). Try not to get overly attached to a hypothesis just because it's yours (or it's "conservative." ) Spin more than one hypothesis - don't simply run with the first idea that caught your fancy. Quantify, wherever possible. If there is a chain of argument every link in the chain must work. Occam's razor - if there are two hypothesis that explain the data equally well choose the simpler. Ask whether the hypothesis can, at least in principle, be falsified (shown to be false by some unambiguous test). In other words, it is testable? Can others duplicate the experiment and get the same result? Additional issues are: Conduct control experiments - especially "double blind" experiments where the person taking measurements is not aware of the test and control subjects. Check for confounding factors - separate the variables. Common fallacies of logic and rhetoric Ad hominem - attacking the arguer and not the argument. Argument from "authority". Argument from adverse consequences (putting pressure on the decision maker by pointing out dire consequences of an "unfavorable" decision). Appeal to ignorance (absence of evidence is not evidence of absence). Special pleading (typically referring to god's will). Begging the question (assuming an answer in the way the question is phrased). A Wendell Cox favorite. Observational selection (counting the hits and forgetting the misses). Statistics of small numbers (such as drawing conclusions from inadequate sample sizes).A common error by Cox. Misunderstanding the nature of statistics (President Eisenhower expressing astonishment and alarm on discovering that fully half of all Americans have below average intelligence!) Inconsistency (e.g. military expenditures based on worst case scenarios but scientific projections on environmental dangers thriftily ignored because they are not "proved"). Non sequitur - "it does not follow" - the logic falls down. Post hoc, ergo propter hoc - "it happened after so it was caused by" - confusion of cause and effect. Meaningless question ("what happens when an irresistible force meets an immovable object?). Excluded middle - considering only the two extremes in a range of possibilities (making the "other side" look worse than it really is). Short-term v. long-term - a subset of excluded middle ("why pursue fundamental science when we have so huge a budget deficit?"). Slippery slope - a subset of excluded middle - unwarranted extrapolation of the effects (give an inch and they will take a mile). Confusion of correlation and causation. Caricaturing (or stereotyping) a position to make it easier to attack. Suppressed evidence or half-truths. Weasel words - for example, use of euphemisms for war such as "police action" to get around limitations on Presidential powers. "An important art of politicians is to find new names for institutions which under old names have become odious to the public" (excerpted from The Planetary Society Australian Volunteer Coordinators Prepared by Michael Paine ) #
Comments:
Post a Comment
|