{"id":12913,"date":"2026-11-09T20:26:38","date_gmt":"2026-11-10T01:26:38","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/pages.charlotte.edu\/aaron-toscano\/?page_id=12913"},"modified":"2026-11-10T11:26:31","modified_gmt":"2026-11-10T16:26:31","slug":"participation05","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"http:\/\/pages.charlotte.edu\/aaron-toscano\/amdm2026\/week-13-conservatism\/participation05\/","title":{"rendered":"In-Class Participation #5"},"content":{"rendered":"<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\"><strong>Logical Fallacies<\/strong><\/h2>\r\n<!-- \/wp:post-content -->\r\n\r\n<!-- wp:paragraph -->\r\n<p>We&#8217;ve covered some logical fallacies this semester, but I wanted to focus your attention on the ones below for the in-class assignment.<\/p>\r\n<!-- \/wp:paragraph -->\r\n\r\n<!-- wp:heading {\"level\":4} -->\r\n<h4 class=\"wp-block-heading\"><strong><em>Reductio Ad Hitlerum<\/em><\/strong>\u00a0(Withey, 168)<\/h4>\r\n<!-- \/wp:heading -->\r\n\r\n<!-- wp:paragraph -->\r\n<p>This doesn\u2019t just have to involve Hitler. The fallacy is <strong><span style=\"font-weight: bold;background-color: yellow\">an extreme version of ad hominem<\/span><\/strong> (pp. 16-28), but instead of attacking the character of a person in an attempt to invalidate a claim, this fallacy uses a practice of someone considered vile (like Hitler) to discredit it. I mean, Hitler drank water\u2026<\/p>\r\n<!-- \/wp:paragraph -->\r\n\r\n<!-- wp:heading {\"level\":4} -->\r\n<h4 class=\"wp-block-heading\"><strong>Godwin&#8217;s Law<\/strong><\/h4>\r\n<!-- \/wp:heading -->\r\n\r\n<!-- wp:paragraph -->\r\n<p>Sometimes <strong><em>Reductio Ad Hitlerum<\/em><\/strong> and Godwin&#8217;s Law are lumped together, but I&#8217;d like to separate them for our purposes. &#8220;Godwin&#8217;s Law&#8230;.holds that the longer an argument drags on, the likelier someone will stoop to a Hitler or Nazi analogy&#8221; (Conniff, p. 128). While the one above follows this (il)logic,<\/p>\r\n<!-- \/wp:paragraph -->\r\n\r\n<!-- wp:list -->\r\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\"><!-- wp:list-item -->\r\n<li>Major Premise: Hitler\/NAZIs\/Fascists did X<\/li>\r\n<!-- \/wp:list-item -->\r\n\r\n<!-- wp:list-item -->\r\n<li>Minor Premise: This group or person also does X<\/li>\r\n<!-- \/wp:list-item -->\r\n\r\n<!-- wp:list-item -->\r\n<li>Conclusion: Therefore, this group or person is just like Hitler.<\/li>\r\n<!-- \/wp:list-item --><\/ul>\r\n<!-- \/wp:list -->\r\n\r\n<!-- wp:paragraph -->\r\n<p>Godwin&#8217;s Law only has to be an association. For instance, the President isn&#8217;t listening to us because he&#8217;s a fascist dictator. Of course, if one is discussing Nazi Germany or other instances of genocidal atrocities, the comparison can be true.<\/p>\r\n<!-- \/wp:paragraph -->\r\n\r\n<!-- wp:heading {\"level\":4} -->\r\n<h4 class=\"wp-block-heading\"><strong>Appeal to Anger<\/strong><\/h4>\r\n<!-- \/wp:heading -->\r\n\r\n<!-- wp:paragraph -->\r\n<p>This next example could be a red herring (Withey, p. 162) or appeal to fear (Withey, p. 58), but I\u2019ll present it here as an appeal to anger. These categories are for an academic exercise and not to claim that pure fallacies exist and are self-evident. Consider this practice.<\/p>\r\n<!-- \/wp:paragraph -->\r\n\r\n<!-- wp:paragraph -->\r\n<p>While campaigning for U.S. Senate in 1964, papa Bush dodged the issue of rampant discrimination (red herring) and implied that he would look out for the white majority that wasn\u2019t protected by the Act. In the context of his speech to an audience of white workers (Carter xiii), Bush was also trying to appeal to the anger of the workers, who might believe minorities would be getting so-called\u00a0<em>special rights<\/em> from this act. Bush\u2019s strategy is typical of those who claim an oppressed group is trying to gain \u201cspecial rights\u201d\u2014rights that somehow supersede their rights. Sometimes people of a majority argue against civil rights by (fallaciously) claiming that they\u2014people of the majority\u2014aren\u2019t being helped by a certain piece of legislation. A politician spotlights this supposed injustice and evokes anger from a group. Here\u2019s the quote:<\/p>\r\n<!-- \/wp:paragraph -->\r\n\r\n<!-- wp:quote -->\r\n<blockquote class=\"wp-block-quote\"><!-- wp:paragraph -->\u201cThe new civil rights act was passed to protect 14 percent of the people. I\u2019m also worried about the other 86 percent.\u201d<br \/>\u2013George H. W. Bush quoted in Carter <!-- \/wp:paragraph --><\/blockquote>\r\n<!-- \/wp:quote -->\r\n\r\n<!-- wp:paragraph -->\r\n<p>So that\u2019s it. We have incontrovertible evidence that the 41st President of the US was an absolute racist\u2026well, let\u2019s offer another example that might mitigate that statement. During the 1991 Louisiana Governor\u2019s race, George H.W. Bush came out against the Republican David Duke (a long-time KKK member) in favor of the Democrat Edwin Edwards. Bush also provided the following unequivocal statement about David Duke:<\/p>\r\n<!-- \/wp:paragraph -->\r\n\r\n<!-- wp:quote -->\r\n<blockquote class=\"wp-block-quote\"><!-- wp:paragraph -->\u201cWhen someone asserts the Holocaust never took place, then I don\u2019t believe that person ever deserves <span style=\"color: #ff0000\"><strong>one iota of public trust<\/strong><\/span>. When someone has so recently endorsed Nazism, it is inconceivable that someone can reasonably aspire to a leadership role in a free society.\u201d<br \/>\u2013George H. W. Bush quoted in Suro <!-- \/wp:paragraph --><\/blockquote>\r\n<!-- \/wp:quote -->\r\n\r\n<!-- wp:paragraph -->\r\n<p>Time Permitting<\/p>\r\n<p>Here\u2019s another political example. Jesse Helms was running for re-election to the Senate in 1990, and Charlotte\u2019s own Harvey B. Gantt opposed him. Helms ran this infamous\u00a0<strong><a href=\"https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/watch?v=KIyewCdXMzk\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">\u201cWhite Hands\u201d<\/a><\/strong>\u00a0ad. Although North Carolinians may take some solace in the fact that Jesse Helms never won overwhelmingly against Gantt, but he never lost, and retired in 2003 having been in that Senate seat since 1973\u201430 years!<\/p>\r\n<!-- \/wp:paragraph -->\r\n\r\n<!-- wp:heading -->\r\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\"><strong>In-Class Assignment: Responding to Rhetorical Messages<\/strong><\/h2>\r\n<!-- \/wp:heading -->\r\n\r\n<!-- wp:paragraph -->\r\n<p>Today, I&#8217;m going to show some clips, and you&#8217;ll take a paper-based &#8220;quiz.&#8221; I hope I&#8217;ve queued these clips up, so we can watch them without any ads disrupting the flow:<\/p>\r\n<!-- \/wp:paragraph -->\r\n\r\n<!-- wp:list -->\r\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\"><!-- wp:list-item -->\r\n<li><strong><a href=\"https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/watch?v=iOtvO_L_XoM\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">Barry Goldwater Endorses Extremism | Flashback | NBC News<\/a><\/strong>: https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/watch?v=iOtvO_L_XoM<!-- wp:list -->\r\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\"><!-- wp:list-item -->\r\n<li>2:12<\/li>\r\n<li>Goldwater and MLK, Jr. both endorse extremism, yet they were on opposite sides of the Civil Rights movement.<\/li>\r\n<!-- \/wp:list-item --><\/ul>\r\n<!-- \/wp:list --><\/li>\r\n<!-- \/wp:list-item -->\r\n\r\n<!-- wp:list-item -->\r\n<li><strong><a href=\"https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/watch?v=JJyWWM9OHKA\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">Mr. Conservative: Barry Goldwater&#8217;s opposition to the Civil Rights Act of 1964<\/a><\/strong>: https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/watch?v=JJyWWM9OHKA<!-- wp:list -->\r\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\"><!-- wp:list-item -->\r\n<li>4:39<\/li>\r\n<li>Consider the rhetorical strategy Goldwater uses in relation to the Eight White Clergyman&#8217;s argument.<\/li>\r\n<!-- \/wp:list-item -->\r\n\r\n<!-- wp:list-item -->\r\n<li>Why would Goldwater show he has Black support even though he&#8217;s opposing desegregation?<\/li>\r\n<!-- \/wp:list-item --><\/ul>\r\n<!-- \/wp:list --><\/li>\r\n<!-- \/wp:list-item -->\r\n\r\n<!-- wp:list-item -->\r\n<li><strong><a href=\"https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/watch?v=M6zcET1MLq8\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">The surprising reason why women were included in the 1964 Civil Rights Act<\/a><\/strong>: https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/watch?v=M6zcET1MLq8<!-- wp:list -->\r\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\"><!-- wp:list-item -->\r\n<li>3:43<\/li>\r\n<li>Why did <strong><a href=\"https:\/\/encyclopediavirginia.org\/entries\/smith-howard-worth-1883-1976\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">Representative Howard Smith of Virginia<\/a><\/strong> want &#8220;sex discrimination&#8221; added to Title VII (7) of the 1964 Civil Rights Act?<\/li>\r\n<!-- \/wp:list-item --><\/ul>\r\n<!-- \/wp:list --><\/li>\r\n<!-- \/wp:list-item -->\r\n\r\n<!-- wp:list-item -->\r\n<li><strong><a href=\"https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/watch?v=YeSCF0ojJQY\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">Thomas Sowell: This is why the left only focuses on race<\/a><\/strong>: https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/watch?v=YeSCF0ojJQY<!-- wp:list -->\r\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\"><!-- wp:list-item -->\r\n<li>7:33<\/li>\r\n<li>What is the most surprising thing about Dr. Sowell&#8217;s argument against the theory of &#8220;institutional [systemic] racism&#8221;?<\/li>\r\n<!-- \/wp:list-item -->\r\n\r\n<!-- wp:list-item -->\r\n<li>From the second half of the interview (4:35 on):<!-- wp:list -->\r\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\"><!-- wp:list-item -->\r\n<li>Does Dr. Sowell&#8217;s point about Black Americans&#8217; incomes rising before the 1964 Civil Rights Act support the argument that Goldwater and the Eight White Clergyman were making when they claimed racial equality was coming? Why or Why not?<\/li>\r\n<!-- \/wp:list-item -->\r\n\r\n<!-- wp:list-item -->\r\n<li>What does Dr. Sowell suggest is the main reason for Black Americans living in poverty after 1940?<\/li>\r\n<!-- \/wp:list-item --><\/ul>\r\n<!-- \/wp:list --><\/li>\r\n<!-- \/wp:list-item --><\/ul>\r\n<!-- \/wp:list --><\/li>\r\n<!-- \/wp:list-item --><\/ul>\r\n<!-- \/wp:list -->\r\n\r\n<!-- wp:paragraph \/-->\r\n\r\n<!-- wp:list -->\r\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\"><!-- wp:list-item -->\r\n<li><strong><a href=\"https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/watch?v=XurbB8Na7lc\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">William Buckley and his drive to propel America to the right<\/a><\/strong>: https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/watch?v=XurbB8Na7lc<!-- wp:list -->\r\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\"><!-- wp:list-item -->\r\n<li>7:00\u00a0<\/li>\r\n<li>What is striking about William F. Buckley&#8217;s voice?<\/li>\r\n<!-- \/wp:list-item -->\r\n\r\n<!-- wp:list-item -->\r\n<li>What is the main argument of Sam Tanenhaus concerning William F. Buckley&#8217;s legacy?<\/li>\r\n<!-- \/wp:list-item --><\/ul>\r\n<!-- \/wp:list --><\/li>\r\n<!-- \/wp:list-item --><\/ul>\r\n<!-- \/wp:list -->\r\n\r\n<!-- wp:heading \/-->\r\n\r\n<!-- wp:separator --><hr class=\"wp-block-separator has-alpha-channel-opacity\" \/><!-- \/wp:separator -->\r\n\r\n<!-- wp:paragraph -->\r\n<p><strong>Works Cited<\/strong><\/p>\r\n<p>Carter, Dan T.\u00a0<em>From George Wallace to Newt Gingrich: Race in the Conservative Counterrevolution, 1963-1994<\/em>. Baton Rouge: Louisiana State UP, 1996.<\/p>\r\n<p>Conniff, Richard. &#8220;In the Name of the Law: How to Win Arguments without Really Trying.&#8221; <em>Smithsonian<\/em>, vol. 38, no. 7, Oct. 2007, p. 128.<\/p>\r\n<p>Sowell, Thomas. <em>The Quest for Cosmic Justice<\/em>. Simon and Schuster, 2001.<\/p>\r\n<p>Suro, Roberto. \u201cTHE 1991 ELECTION: Louisiana; Bush Denounces Duke As Racist and Charlatan.\u201d\u00a0<em>The New York Times<\/em>, 7 Nov. 1991, p. 18. https:\/\/www.nytimes.com\/1991\/11\/07\/us\/the-1991-election-louisiana-bush-denounces-duke-as-racist-and-charlatan.html<\/p>\r\n<p>Withey, Michael. <em>Mastering Logical Fallacies: The Definitive Guide to Flawless Rhetoric and Bulletproof Logic<\/em>. Zephyros P, 2016.<\/p>\r\n<!-- \/wp:paragraph -->\r\n\r\n<!-- wp:paragraph \/-->\r\n\r\n<!-- wp:paragraph \/-->\r\n\r\n<!-- wp:paragraph \/-->\r\n\r\n<!-- wp:paragraph \/-->\r\n\r\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Logical Fallacies We&#8217;ve covered some logical fallacies this semester, but I wanted to focus your attention on the ones below for the in-class assignment. Reductio Ad Hitlerum\u00a0(Withey, 168) This doesn\u2019t just have to involve Hitler. The fallacy is an extreme version of ad hominem (pp. 16-28), but instead of attacking the character of a person [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":598,"featured_media":0,"parent":12902,"menu_order":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","template":"","meta":{"_jetpack_hide_featured_image":false,"_jetpack_featured_image_duplicate_dismissed":0,"footnotes":""},"class_list":["post-12913","page","type-page","status-publish","hentry"],"jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/P2HAOx-3mh","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/pages.charlotte.edu\/aaron-toscano\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/12913","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"http:\/\/pages.charlotte.edu\/aaron-toscano\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages"}],"about":[{"href":"http:\/\/pages.charlotte.edu\/aaron-toscano\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/page"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/pages.charlotte.edu\/aaron-toscano\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/598"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/pages.charlotte.edu\/aaron-toscano\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=12913"}],"version-history":[{"count":8,"href":"http:\/\/pages.charlotte.edu\/aaron-toscano\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/12913\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":12948,"href":"http:\/\/pages.charlotte.edu\/aaron-toscano\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/12913\/revisions\/12948"}],"up":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/pages.charlotte.edu\/aaron-toscano\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/12902"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/pages.charlotte.edu\/aaron-toscano\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=12913"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}