- Feb 15, 2013
- 8,824
- 6,252
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Reformed
- Marital Status
- Married
I think of it more as a real life application of a philosophical principle.
Upvote
0
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
That's called an appeal to emotion and I'm not playing.
It's unlikely that a patient would literally see 100 doctors. But let's say that my 3 year old son was "terminally" ill and we see 10 doctors. If 9 say that there's no chance of survival and 1 says that there's a chance, I'm going to put my money on the one. If one qualified authority believes it's possible for my son to survive then I'm going to pursue that path and fight for his life.
Would you not do the same?
I think of it more as a real life application of a philosophical principle.
Appeal to emotion or argumentum ad passiones is a logical fallacy which uses the manipulation of the recipient's emotions, rather than valid logic, to win an argument. The appeal to emotion fallacy uses emotions as the basis of an argument's position without factual evidence that logically supports the major ideas endorsed by the elicitor of the argument. Also, this kind of thinking may be evident in one who lets emotions and/or other subjective considerations influence one's reasoning process. This kind of appeal to emotion is a type of red herring and encompasses several other logical fallacies.
Instead of facts, persuasive language is used to develop the foundation of an appeal to emotion-based argument. Thus, the validity of the premises that establish such an argument does not prove to be verifiable.
Conclusively, the appeal to emotion fallacy presents a perspective intended to be superior to reason. Appeals to emotion are intended to draw visceral feelings from the acquirer of the information. And in turn, the acquirer of the information is intended to be convinced that the statements that were presented in the fallacious argument are true; solely on the basis that the statements may induce emotional stimulation such as fear, pity and joy. Though these emotions may be provoked by an appeal to emotion fallacy, substantial proof of the argument is not offered, and the argument's premises remain invalid.
Think of the children (and similar phrases citing the interests of children including what about the children) can be used to justify why something should, or should not, be done. When used as a plea for pity, this appeal to emotion can constitute a potential logical fallacy, while when used as an appeal for sympathy for weaker members of society, or the social good of the long-term health and viability of a society, it can constitute an argument for social justice generally accepted as appropriate.
I think of it more as a real life application of a philosophical principle.
Of course I would, because you are talking about a life and death scenario and who wouldn't roll over every rock to keep any chance alive.
Life and death, black and white is not a good analogy though.
Let's say 9 doctors say your son needs to be treated with a specific treatment protocol, that they all agree is the best course. But, one doctor, disagrees and happens to be a devout Christian and states; those treatments recommended by the other doctors go against what God would want and he only recommends praying to help your 3 year old child.
Would you follow the 9 doctors, or the 1 outlier?
It is an appeal to emotion and emotion, can get in the way of being objective and making the right judgments, based on the facts.
Doctors are basically scientists and they are supposed to look at the clinical evidence and make an objective call, not an emotional call.
It may not be an emotional call for the doctor but it's an emotional decision for the patient/client. To ask a person to complete remove emotion from their decision making is to ask them to do the impossible. It's to ask them to cease being a person for a moment. We can't do it. Now, this doesn't mean that we should be governed only by emotion or primarily by emotion. But we cannot make an emotionless decision.
Of course you don't. But it is.
It's unlikely that the 1 out of 99 will be right.
But if 99 doctors say that there's no chance of survival and 1 doctor says there's a chance what are you going to believe?
I would believe that the 99/100 are probably correct.
I would investigate to see if the 1/100 might offer a long shot solution.
I would NOT waste time asking an invisible sky daddy for help.
Is that God?
Is that God?
Nah it's just a wiz.
This is where objective evidence to support an authorities explanation, becomes the great equalizer. That evidence will be there, whether some like it or not.
Now, this doesn't mean that we should be governed only by emotion or primarily by emotion. But we cannot make an emotionless decision.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?