|
An argumentum ad populum (Latin: "appeal to the people"), in logic, is a fallacious argument that concludes a proposition to be true because many or all people believe it; it alleges that "If many believe so, it is so." In ethics this argument is stated, "if many find it acceptable, it is acceptable." This type of argument is known by several names, including appeal to belief, appeal to the majority, appeal to the people, argument by consensus, authority of the many, bandwagon fallacy, and tyranny of the majority, and in Latin by the names argumentum ad populum ("appeal to the people"), argumentum ad numerum ("appeal to the number"), and consensus gentium ("agreement of the clans"). It is also the basis of a number of social phenomena, including communal reinforcement and the bandwagon effect, and of the Chinese proverb "three men make a tiger".
Examples This fallacy is sometimes committed while trying to convince a person that a widely popular theory is true. It is sometimes committed when trying to convince a person that widely unpopular theories are false. The fallacy is commonly found in arguments over ethics: The fallacy is also commonly found in marketing: Other examples: Explanation The argumentum ad populum is a red herring and genetic fallacy. It is logically fallacious because the mere fact that a belief is widely held is not necessarily a guarantee that the belief is correct; if the belief of any individual can be wrong, then the belief held by multiple persons can also be wrong. This fallacy is similar in structure to certain other fallacies that involve a confusion between the justification of a belief and its widespread acceptance by a given group of people. When an argument uses the appeal to the beliefs of a group of supposed experts, it takes on the form of an appeal to authority; if the appeal is to the beliefs of a group of respected elders or the members of one's community over a long period of time, then it takes on the form of an appeal to tradition. One who commits this fallacy may assume that individuals commonly analyze and edit their beliefs and behaviors. This is often not the case (see conformity). Evidence Exceptions Appeal to belief is only valid when the question is whether the belief exists. Appeal to popularity is therefore only valid when the questions are whether the belief is widespread and to what degree. Democracy The "correctness" of electoral processes lies in the prior acceptance by the electorate that the outcome of an election shall be enacted no matter what it is. Democracy by plural voting is based on appeal to popularity. As a means of determining the truth of beliefs, it is fallacious. Democracy does not obviate this; it merely makes the fallacy irrelevant by defining law as subjective rather than objective Argumentum ad populum explains how some democracies have fallen victim to this principle. (See Propaganda and Nazi Germany.) Social convention Matters of social convention, such as etiquette or polite manners, depend upon the wide acceptance of the convention. As such, argumentum ad populum is not fallacious when referring to the popular belief about what is polite or proper: Social conventions can change, however, sometimes very quickly. Thus, the fact that everyone in Russia this year thinks that it is polite to kiss can't be used as evidence that everyone always believed that, or that they should always believe it. The philosophical question of moral relativism asks whether such arguments apply to statements of morals. Safety Whether to follow a tenet decided by popularity rather than logical design may be a matter of safety or convenience: In this case, the choice of which side to drive on is basically arbitrary. However, to avoid head-on collisions, everyone on the road must agree on it. In many cases, what is safe to do depends on what others expect one will do, and thus on the "popularity" of that choice. See also | ||||||||
|
| |||||||||
 |
|
| |