Three Common Mistakes

Human beings seem to just love a good argument. We love to argue about politics, religion, entertainment, and everything else under the sun. I actually don't think this is automatically a bad thing. Arguing is, at its core, an act of refining ideas and understanding by bringing your views into contrast with someone else's. If done correctly this results in growth and increased wisdom.

Unfortunately, as with all things, we tend not to argue correctly.

Instead of evaluating ideas objectively we get angry, allow bias to cloud our thoughts, and commit many mistakes that don't just prevent conversations but actively set them back. Often times we don't even realize that we are doing any of these things when we argue or engage in a discussion of ideas. As a result so many of what could be productive discussions or healthy arguments, especially on social media, devolve into shouting matches and name calling.

Today I want to talk briefly about three common mistakes, or logical fallacies, that we commit when debating ideas. While not directly tied to the Bible or God knowing these things can help a great deal when discussing the Gospel so we don't make mistakes that inadvertently shut down the conversation. The other thing that can happen is that the people we are talking to pick up on our error and assume the whole story of Jesus is faulty. So here are three very common mistakes I see, and make, when arguing.

#1. The Genetic Fallacy

Don't let the fancy name throw you off because the genetic fallacy is quite common. Simply put, this is when you either dismiss or accept an argument based on WHERE/WHO IT COMES FROM and not on the points themselves. For example, when Donald Trump and Republicans talked about making Juneteenth a holiday many people I knew supported the idea. However, once Joe Biden and the Democrats did it these same people decried it as a horrible idea.

Why?

It had nothing to do with Juneteenth or the merits/lack of merits thereof, but had everything to do with where the idea was coming from. This is the genetic fallacy and we commit it all the time. An argument or idea can be good or bad independent of who presented it. Our job when engaging with people is to seriously consider their ideas and not blindly accept or dismiss them based on where they come from. 

#2. Ad Hominem Attack

Again, don't let the Latin throw you off. Ad Hominem simply means "to the man." This is when we attack the person rather than evaluate their argument or points. Staying on political examples (perhaps because I see this here more than anywhere) when Joe Biden talks about the infrastructure bill I've seen people comment things like, "This bill is bad because Sleepy Joe is a crook who doesn't know how to raise kids and is in the pocket of China and is corrupt." 

That is an attack on Biden and not on the actual bill. This happens on both sides, of course, but also happens everywhere. We go after the person making the point and not the point. This has happened to me after sermons I preached where people, never to me directly, accuse me of being woke or too young and stupid to understand things. Never attack the person, but rather evaluate the argument.

#3. Straw Man Fallacy

This might be the most common. The straw man fallacy is where you attack a fake, weaker version of what someone has said than what they actually said. For example I am not a Calvinist. However, I would not agree with someone who got up and said, "Calvinism doesn't believe in free will and has God as a nonchalant despot who decides willy-nilly who goes to heaven and who goes to hell."

That is a straw man argument. It doesn't take into account what Calvinists really say and believe, but rather builds a weak caricature and attacks that. We see this all the time. People don't really engage another person's ideas but build straw men and attack them to make their own position seem stronger.

The solution to this one is actually called "steel manning." Instead of making a weak version of the argument to easily destroy, go out of your way to make the position you disagree with as strong as possible. Really throw yourself into it and learn it and present it as if you fervently believe it. Then, and only then, once you've built it up as strong as possible you begin to explain why you disagree.

These are three common mistakes we make when arguing or discussing ideas. There are more, but avoiding these three helps us connect with others and present our own ideas more clearly. This is part of, I think, what the Bible says about being "above reproach." Don't give others a reason to dismiss what we have to say out of hand so that we are trustworthy when it comes to Jesus and the Gospel.