Difference between revisions of "Black box argument"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
m (capitalization fixes) |
m (→Overview: reasononing) |
||
| Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
[[Black box argument]]s do ''not'' include: | [[Black box argument]]s do ''not'' include: | ||
| − | * 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 23:57, 26 August 2006
Overview
A black box argument is any argument where the premise is for any reason not debatable. The phrase "black box" refers to the systems concept of a device or other system whose internals are either unknown or irrelevant.
Black box arguments include:
- argument from authority: the source of this argument cannot be wrong on this subject
- the Chewbacca defense: the premise is incomprehensible
- the appeal to belief: everyone believes it, so it must be true
Black box arguments do not include:
- 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.