UMW philosophy professor Craig Vasey writes with conviction in defense of the virtue of higher education ["Logic missing in FLS editorial," Jan. 6].
But he hoists himself with his own petard when he impugns the logic of the editor who criticizes some of the course offerings in the postmodernist liberal arts curriculum ["Higher ed?" Jan. 2].
Asserting that the argument of the editorial is inconsistent, the professor drops the name of several com-mon logical fallacies (hasty generalization, petitio principii , ad hominen , red herring).
But that's all he does--just drop the names. Thus the professor himself is committing the ipse dixit fallacy ("It's true because I say it is"), asking the reader to accept his assertion just on his say-so.
Dropping the names without explaining also has the effect of what Madsen Pirie of the Adam Smith Institute (my apologies for the ad verecundium ploy here, professor) calls the "every schoolboy knows" fallacy.
It's based on the assumption, or at least hope, that people won't challenge what you say for fear of sounding uninformed or ill-educated.
In its more benign form, this technique might be termed the "we hold these truths to be self-evident" fallacy. But in its more insidious application, it becomes the "any fool can see" fallacy.
Of course, the obvious counter to this ploy is what might be styled the "every schoolboy can Google-search it" approach.
But even then, once we know what the terms mean, we are still expected to readily recognize them in the editorial and concur with the professor's claim.
Maybe these fallacies are in the editorial, maybe not. But in using the ipse dixit fallacy, a philosophy professor is relying not on logos (logic) but on ethos (his title) to persuade his readers.
No, as every schoolboy--or girl
David Sellers
Spotsylvania