Difference between revisions of "Black box argument"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
(tweaks, SMW, link to new "black box" page) |
|||
| (5 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| − | + | <hide> | |
| − | [[ | + | [[page type::article]] |
| + | [[thing type::rhetorical deception]] | ||
| + | [[category:rhetorical deceptions]] | ||
| + | [[category:terms of convenience]] | ||
| + | [[category:philosophy]] | ||
| + | </hide> | ||
| + | ==About== | ||
| + | A [[black box argument]] is any argument where key components of the argument (e.g. the premises and reasoning) are not open to debate. It is a form of [[rhetorical deception]] in that the lack of [[falsifiability]] means that [[emotional argument]]s are much more likely to be effective in convincing the audience to agree. | ||
| − | [[Black box | + | The phrase "[[system design/black box|black box]]" refers to the [[wikipedia:Black box (systems)|systems]] concept of a system component whose internals are not up for discussion. |
| + | |||
| + | Types of black box arguments: | ||
* [[argument from authority]]: the source of this argument cannot be wrong on this subject | * [[argument from authority]]: the source of this argument cannot be wrong on this subject | ||
| − | * the [[Chewbacca defense]]: the | + | * the [[Chewbacca defense]]: the argument is incomprehensible |
| − | * the [[appeal to | + | * the [[appeal to popularity]]: everyone believes it, so it must be true |
| − | + | Types of arguments that are ''not'' black box: | |
| − | * the [[appeal to consensus]]: a true [[consensus]] involves discussion of lines of reasoning which can be further examined by those outside the consensus. If those lines of | + | * the [[appeal to consensus]]: a true [[consensus]] involves discussion of lines of reasoning which can be further examined by those outside the consensus. If those lines of reasoning are not available for examination, then the consensus becomes simply an unsubstantiated [[belief]]. |
Revision as of 13:03, 6 May 2012
About
A black box argument is any argument where key components of the argument (e.g. the premises and reasoning) are not open to debate. It is a form of rhetorical deception in that the lack of falsifiability means that emotional arguments are much more likely to be effective in convincing the audience to agree.
The phrase "black box" refers to the systems concept of a system component whose internals are not up for discussion.
Types of black box arguments:
- argument from authority: the source of this argument cannot be wrong on this subject
- the Chewbacca defense: the argument is incomprehensible
- the appeal to popularity: everyone believes it, so it must be true
Types of arguments that are not black box:
- the appeal to consensus: a true consensus involves discussion of lines of reasoning which can be further examined by those outside the consensus. If those lines of reasoning are not available for examination, then the consensus becomes simply an unsubstantiated belief.