FACT CHECKING TRUMP, AND ANYONE ELSE. PART 3.

 

Too often we allow our Feelings, Prejudices, Pre-Conceived Ideas, and Physical and Emotional Desires to lead us to draw conclusions that, Logically, are Invalid or not Proven to be Factual.

This, of course, is an error in Judgment anyone can make. Progressive or Conservative, Democrat or Republican, Well Informed or Ignorant. etc No one is immune to the Intellectual and/or Emotional Satisfaction of being Right or Vindicated in what they believe to be true.

The Problem is what one does when faced with contradictory Facts or Arguments that indicate that their Conclusion(s) are in error.

To make this easier to understand, let us examine two BASIC TYPES OF LOGICAL ARGUMENTS.

VALID DEDUCTIVE ARGUMENT: IF THE PREMISES ARE TRUE, THE CONCLUSION MUST BE TRUE. This establishes Conclusions that cannot reasonably be considered to be incorrect.

EXAMPLE:

PREMISE 1- Human Beings cannot survive in an environment where water is not present.

PREMISE2: Planet X is barren of any water supply.

CONCLUSION: Mankind cannot survive on Planet X.

As you can see, if we provide enough factual data that both premises are True, the Conclusion itself must be accepted as true.

So, when someone asserts something as Truthful, and you disagree, your first question should not be similar to the following:

"Your wrong, because I learned/Heard/Read something that proves you are incorrect."

That in itself usually leads to dueling opinions, because your contradictory statement must also be properly argued.

Try this instead: "That is interesting. Tell me what Data or Facts lead you to believe that to be true?"

Now you are not contradicting the speaker, but are forcing them to:

- Offer a Validly constructed argument. 

- Create premises that support the conclusion they are making, each of which also must be defended as true.

In the above example of Planet X, the conclusion that Mankind cannot live on Planet X rests solely on both premises being true, and that there is satisfactory Data that cannot be refuted that proves the accuracy of both premises.