Toast Masters P3 Script : "L" for ...

Fellow Toastmasters, if I say the letter “L”, which word comes to your mind first?

[ The audience said a range of words - Love, Life, Laughter... ]

I am a little disappointed that no one said "Logic". Its always this overrated 'love', 'luck' etc. But you know, logic has single-handedly transformed the entire humanity from being clueless neanderthals to a species that conquered this planet and many more planets to come. The purpose of my speech today is to resurrect the role of logic in everyday life. The monumental importance of standing logically-correct amidst the cacophony of illogical chatter and 'fallacies'! We will try to understand some common fallacies, so that we can appear smart and also win some arguments :)

Early greek philosophers  used ‘Argument’ or ‘Dialectics’ as the chief tool to reason out everything. They did not have the elaborate scientific methods of the modern times. There were no formalism techniques to prove their hypothesis. Argument was the only means. And metaphysics evolved leaps and bounds using this tool.  They eventually discovered that argument has 2 parts – Logic and Rhetoric. Logic is an absolute truth that appeals to everyone at all points in time. It is irrefutable. For example, All men are Mortal. I am a man, therefore I am mortal. There is no room for personal feelings, sympathies or prejudices here.

But, rhetoric, on the other hand involves personal appeal. You might have noticed that people in public life like politicians, artists and stars use the personal charm as a very effective tool. How did Hitler manage to convince an entire nation to take such a position against a race? How did Obama manage to create a feeling of euphoria even though “the change” was only promised on the air? Being logically flawless and also equally rhetoric, one can unleash a nuclear scale of impact.

As for me, I disqualify myself in the rhetorics department. Once, a wife told her husband that she wished he is like a poem so that she can read him again and again but would still be amused. The husband replied that he wished she is like a christmas gift so that he can get a new one every year. He was logically correct but his rhetorics would have denied him his happy endings for the next 10 years. I can relate to that man myself. But as a practicing engineer, I have earned myself some qualification to talk about logic and the fallacies.

Now, I want to present to you 3 top logical fallacies that people make in everyday conversation. Listen carefully, there is going to be a test at the end of this speech :)

The first one is called Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc fallacy. There is always a complex chain of events that cause an outcome. This is Chaos Theory. But its  human limitation that we usually tend to account for the event that happened just before the observable outcome. And we quickly conclude that that particular event caused this outcome. 

Every day, a lady in Singapore would come out of her home and shout, "God, please keep my home safe from tigers". A visitor curiously asked her why does she pray for that while there are no tigers in the next 100 miles. She replied excitedly, "See, that is only because of my prayer". This is classic post-hoc-ergo-proper-hoc.

The next one is the Circular Argument fallacy. When this new Indian chief took over the regime, the natives consulted him if the winter is going to be harsh. He took a safe stand and told them to start collecting woods. That day he secretly called the Weather Service and they tipped him that the winter could be harsh. The next day when people asked him the same question, he told them yes and asked them to collect even more woods. In parallel, he also called the weather service and got an affirmation that it most likely would be a harsh winter. This went on for few weeks. Finally, the chief called the weather service for one last time and asked them how can they be so sure. The reply was, "Because the Indians are feverishly collecting woods". 

The last fallacy is Respect for Authority – Ted meets his friend Al and exclaims, "Al! I heard you died!". "Hardly", said Al. "As you can see, I am very much in front of you". "Impossible", says Ted. "The man who told me that is much more reliable than you". Seriously, how often we take our parents, elders, society and holy books without an iota of doubt?

Knowing these fallacies and how they limit our understanding of the world would liberate us. And I hope you found this discussion useful. Thank you.