Faculty follies - multiliteracies: a crutch or a crock?

According to one Vance Stevens at this address...

The term 'multiliteracies' was coined by the New London Group (1996) to address "the multiplicity of communications channels and increasing cultural and linguistic diversity in the world today" for students and users of technology through "creating access to the evolving language of work, power, and community, and fostering the critical engagement necessary for them to design their social futures and achieve success through fulfilling employment." From an educational standpoint, the concept of multiliteracies refers to how people must adapt to the changing nature of communication in a digital age and to what must be inculcated in students in order for them to succeed in lives where productivity depends on keeping up with technology.

I have been fascinated by the concept of "multiliteracies" for some time. The most convinced advocates of multiliteracies tend to be somewhat illiterate. I therefore wonder whether their fascination with multiliteracies is a crutch - a means of avoiding the demands of actual literacy, or of disguising personal deficits in literacy. Advocates of multiliteracies claim that multiliteracies need to be "taught". School time needs to be spent teaching students how to view television programs, how to log onto the internet and use a search engine, how to download music and images, how to set up email accounts, weblogs and chat rooms. Of course, time spent teaching these multiliteracies in class inevitably take time away from other pursuits - mostly peripheral and dispensible activities such as reading and writing.

I often wonder how I ever managed to engage with digital technology. For you see, back in the olden days I was only taught literacy at school. Hmmmm! Fortunately, I have found that when (for example) I developed an inchoate interest in new (to me) software such as Photoshop, that the software designers and marketers of the product decided to put words on the packaging and to use words in the instructions. Further, I found that many experts in the use of Photoshop had decided to write books about the use of the software. These books too contained words (and pictures... printed on a page). Not having been schooled in multiliteracies of course, it took me ages to learn how to use photoshop - perhaps 30 to 40 minutes before I was able to play with images off the web, and another hour or two before I was able to download, file, enhance and manipulate images from my digital camera.

If only I had been able to spend several tedious weeks being instructed by a teacher in how to use the basics of photoshop - in school - as part of a multiliteracy program. I could have saved 30 or 40 minutes of relaxed reading and creative and enjoyable image manipulation in the privacy of my own home. What a crock of shite.

Media Watch's not so subtle slope

Media Watch resorts to a Slippery Slope argument by implication in order defend itself from accusations of bias. First there's this entry about Media Watch's future:

...under our new editorial policies, we will be looking for further diversity of voices - ensuring that the ABC is the town square where debate can flourish and different voices can be heard. I've encouraged the Director of Television to work with the Media Watch team to review their format and content next year to ensure there is more opportunity for debate and discussion around contentious and important issues. It is a popular program, has a loyal following and I hope has a long future at the ABC.

The entry after this on the Media Watch website is about the new rules at the ABC. A not so subtle attempt to scare us with a Slippery Slope:

The ABC already has comprehensive editorial policies and many aspects won't change.

But the revised rules give extra emphasis to existing requirements for impartiality and balance.

And some ABC broadcasters are concerned about what that could mean in practice.

…The Science Show with Robyn Williams and The Health Report with Norman Swan.

Two of the ABC's most respected and popular programs.

Norman Swan says that many advocates of alternative medicine consider his work to be biased.

…The Health Report favours evidence-based medicine but health issues are highly contentious and hotly debated.

Will health be a matter of opinion under the new guidelines?

…Creationists have lobbied hard to have their claims for creation science and intelligent design considered a legitimate scientific alternative to evolution.

So should they be given a place on The Science Show?

…Both Robyn Williams and Norman Swan hope that the ABC will resist the pressure from vocal lobby groups.

Implying that the ABC expecting impartial and balanced commentary on the media by Media Watch, might lead to creation science being given equal time on The Science Show, as (say) evolution, is a joke. Unlike Media Watch, a show hosted by a pontificating pseudo-journalist, The Science Show and The Health Report are already impartial and balanced. Both these shows are dealing with science and therefore won't discuss non-science. Media Watch, however, discusses the media. It should be just as hard on the "left" as it is on the "right". Maybe Media Watch should just stick to what it used to be good for, spotting plagiarism and typos.

_______________

Tags: Fallacy, Slippery Slope.

Schopenhaeur anticipates Bob Dylan

Brainiac Arthur Schopenhaeur has featured here before. I do like his aphorisms... food for thought... here's one:

That a man shall attain this inner unity is the impossible and inconsistent pretension put forward by almost all philosophers. For as a man it is natural to him to be at war with himself as long as he lives. While he can be only one thing thoroughly, he has the disposition to be everything else, and the inalienable possibility of being it. If he has made his choice of one thing, all the other possibilities are always open to him, and are constantly claiming to be realised; and he has therefore to be continuously keeping them back, and to be overpowering and killing them as long as he wants to be that one thing. For example, if he wants to think only, and not act and do business, the disposition to the latter is not thereby destroyed all at once; but as long as the thinker lives, he has every hour to keep on killing the acting and pushing man that is within him; always battling with himself, as though he were a monster whose head is no sooner struck off than it grows again. In the same way, if he is resolved to be a saint, he must kill himself so far as he is a being that enjoys and is given over to pleasure; for such he remains as long as he lives. It is not once for all that he must kill himself: he must keep on doing it all his life. If he has resolved upon pleasure, whatever be the way in which it is to be obtained, his lifelong struggle is with a being that desires to be pure and free and holy; for the disposition remains, and he has to kill it every hour. And so on in everything, with infinite modifications; it is now one side of him, and now the other, that conquers; he himself is the battlefield. If one side of him is continually conquering, the other is continually struggling; for its life is bound up with his own, and, as a man, he is the possibility of many contradictions.

For those who couldn't be bothered wading through "Schoppy" (as I like to call him), have a gander at this phrase from Bob Dylan's lyrics to Maggie's Farm, viz: "Well, I try my best to be just like I am."

I think Dylan really nails it... and his tunes are way better than Schoppy's.

46th Skeptics’ Circle

...is up at Left Brain/Right Brain.

Go Now!

David Marr - arch hypocrite

Sometime author and LAME commentator David Marr has been giving a great deal of publicity to and favourable commentary about an unauthorised biography of another LAME commentator, one Alan Jones. The biography in question was written by yet another LAME commentator by the name of Chris Masters. Masters makes a great deal of the alleged homosexuality of Jones. Marr agrees with Masters' castigation of Jones. The alleged homosexuality of Jones is alleged to have led to grievous character flaws in Jones. As far as I can tell, the character flaws manifest themselves in Jones' political outlook (with which Marr and Masters disagree).

So far so good, it just looks like a straightforward case of homophobia. Gross, gratuitous and nasty, but commonplace nevertheless.

But here's the kicker. Marr is a homosexual who wrote a biography about another homosexual (author Patrick White). Marr has also leapt to the defence of other homosexuals who have been "outed" in the past.

Hmm... it seems that Marr wishes to make a case that some homosexuals warrant our sympathy, and others don't. I agree with him in a sense - after this witch-hunt I have sympathy for one homosexual - Jones, and no sympathy for another - Marr.

Incidentally, spot the pun in the title... and the rug on Marr's head (which seems to have increased in area since I did this caricature).

Faculty follies - JAFA: a useful acronym

I know that the language purists among you would not readily accept JAFA as an acronym, as it is not strictly speaking a "word formed from the initial letters of other words" (OED). However, if it grows in popularity, I have hopes that it may eventually become a word (just as LASER became laser - through utility, and frequency of usage).

I came across JAFA recently in a secondary source (Frank Devine: The quick brown fox - using Australian English). Devine cites JAFA as an entry in a glossary of coinages by Antarctic expeditioners - a glossary compiled by Bernadette Hince, a visiting fellow at the Australian National Dictionary Centre in Canberra.

Devine notes that Bernadette herself got used to being called a JAFA by personnel at Australian Antarctic bases.

JAFA = Just Another F***ing Academic.

Since I first heard this coinage, I have used it frequently. Indeed, I don't know how I ever did without it. I look forward to using it frequently during scholarly assemblages such as faculty meetings and conferences. I will use it without explanation, but if an explanation is sought, I will be more than happy to give one.

(Note that "Jafa" rolls off Australian tongues as it is the brand name of a candy-covered chocolate ball, much used by lads of my vintage as missiles in darkened movie theatres.)

Dealing with humbug - the surreal utterance

In my blogger profile, I state that one of my interests is making surreal utterances. The cartoon adjacent documents an actual incident in which I used a surreal utterance to good effect.

It happened this way. A few days ago a person knocked at my door. He was obviously a keyed-up salesman, and he began a spiel in which he sought to recruit me to a subcription scheme (which was tied in some mysterious way to car repairs). At first, I uttered mildly puzzling responses. For example, I said I had no need of such a scheme, as I never repaired my cars. When he sought details, I said that I continued driving my cars, ignoring the need for maintenance etc until they broke down irretrievably. I then dumped them at the side of the road, and bought a new car.

This type of off-the-wall response is normally enough to send the salesman on his way, but this one persisted, as my strange responses at least had something to do with cars. In the face of such resistance, I implemented my fail-safe option - the surreal utterance. I looked furtively up and down the street, put my finger to my lips and cautioned him to be silent. I then motioned for him to come closer, and enunciated slowly and clearly (in the manner of a secret password) "the fish has scales which are rough, but when the moon is full, the scales shimmer in April".

He took off up the driveway like a scalded cat.

Words worth espousing - cacoethes

Had an email from "GG" who found us via Tim Blair, and had some nice things to say about humbugonline. But that's not important now (c.f. Leslie Nielsen in Spy Hard). The imporant thing is that GG offered me a gift: a word I have not heard before, but which will now become an essential part of my vocabulary. In the past, when I have said or done something inadvisable, I have claimed by way of mitigation that I have Tourette's Syndrome or that the Devil made me do it (respectively). Now I have one word which covers all such cases.

Cacoethes (OED) Noun - an urge to do something inadvisable.

Perfect! Thanks GG

Have you ever paid money for one of these?

If so, I can only assume you are not too bright...

From the CHOICE 2006 Shonky Awards we have Ten products to make you weep in despair.

Here is my personal favourite:

The CHOICE Shonky for a Lot of Hot Oxygen

Goes to…

OXYGEN4LIFE

Feeling tired? Run down? Flat? Then you could drink 10ml of this product’s “bio-available oxygen” once or twice a day and “keep your body topped up with oxygen” for “enhanced quality of life”. Or you could breathe — which is widely regarded as the platinum standard for oxygenating your blood. And it’s much cheaper too: the 250ml of de-ionised water, Atlantic sea salt and “bio-available oxygen” that make up OXYGEN4LIFE cost us $55.

At least after being talked to by the NSW Food Authority, the company has revised its labelling and removed a number of health claims.

WTF?. But wait, there's more:

The CHOICE ‘Pigs Can Fly’ Shonky

LIFE MIRACLE Magnetic Laundry System

Add these two magnetic balls to your washing machine instead of detergent — so the promise goes — and they’ll clean your clothes with “nature’s most powerful force”. If they meant ‘water’ by that, we’d agree — washing with the balls and plain water had about the same cleaning effect as washing in plain water alone (the centre and right swatches respectively in the photo above; the one on the left was washed in detergent).

Why you’d want to add $80 worth of magnetic balls to the water is one of life’s true miracles.

The next isn't a WTF? But why would you get an iPod when you could get a pocket pc, like my beautiful Dell Axim?

The CHOICE iSHONK for Dual-level Shonkyness

Goes to the…

APPLE iPod

An iPod is a significant investment, so you don’t want your APPLE to be a lemon. And if there is something wrong with it, you’d expect an easy repair and warranty service. Podluck.
Level 1. Several readers complained about cracked screens, faulty batteries and problems with sound reproduction.
Level 2. APPLE doesn’t allow retailers to handle complaints under warranty (which is their obligation under Fair Trading laws) — you have to send your faulty iPod to APPLE yourself via Australia Post. And if they decide the fault isn’t covered by the warranty, you’ll have to foot the entire bill.

And maybe this could make a good bumper sticker?

Special Mention - The CHOICE Shonky for Shonkyest Quote

“We don’t consider wholemeal flour to be a characterising ingredient in wholemeal bread.”

Awarded to a manufacturer of wholemeal bread, for their creative interpretation of what is or isn’t a characterising ingredient according to the Food Standards Code.
______________
Hat Tip Ben

Tags: Skepticism, Fallacy, WTF? Fallacy.

Words worth espousing - "bumf"

Every morning at work I check my bumf hole? Some days I check it two or three times. Occasionally I ask a colleague to check it for me. Do you?

Bumf: That portion of the enormous mass of official correspondence which was used for a more undignified purpose than originally intended. Later applied more generally to correspondence and literature of little value.

This was an abbreviation of ‘bumfodder’ current from 1889 as schoolboys’ slang for ‘toilet paper’. In the war it was applied to official correspondence, most of which was viewed as unnecessary. It has acquired general currency for paperwork since World War I. Also spelt ‘bumph’.

Bumper stickers

On the way home from work I had to put up with quite a few moronic and tautological bumper stickers. For example, my old favourite: Girls can do anything! (Anything except remember the fact that they can do anything, hence the need for the sticker. Also, does "anything" include pee while standing up without making a mess? I'm aware a lot of men are incapable of this too btw.) And one I hadn't come across before: The U.S. does not speak for US. (Speak for yourself moron.)

It reminded me of part of our discussion on Argument by Slogan in our book Humbug!:

It is possible for argument by slogan to manifest itself in even more mindless ways. One of the most outstandingly mindless is the mass-produced "bumper sticker". Sloganeering marches may be futile, but at least walking and chanting is a mild form of healthy exercise. Political bumper stickers really only have one message, whatever the actual words on the sticker itself. The message? "I am a clueless poseur and I apparently believe, in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary, that an infantile declarative statement stuck on the outside of my car amounts to a persuasive argument. Further, I am so bereft of wit, imagination, initiative and literary skills that I have to purchase the sticker off the shelf, rather than creating one of my own."

We know that this might seem to some to be a harsh judgment. But truth must prevail, even if the truth offends those asinine advocates who are also sticklers for stickers.

Well, here are a few slogans on bumper stickers that meet my approval (via an old email):

• He who laughs last, thinks slowest.
• Everyone has a photographic memory. Some don't have film.
• A day without sunshine is like, well, night.
• On the other hand, you have different fingers.
• Change is inevitable, except from a vending machine.
• I just got lost in thought. It was unfamiliar territory.
• When the chips are down, the buffalo is empty.
• Those who live by the sword get shot by those who don't.
• Honk if you love peace and quiet.
• Despite the cost of living, have you noticed how it remains so popular?
• Nothing is fool-proof to a sufficiently talented fool.
• Just remember...if the world didn't suck, we'd all fall off.
• The 50-50-90 rule: Anytime you have a 50-50 chance of getting something right, there's a 90% probability you'll get it wrong.
• It is said that if you line up all the cars in the world end to end, someone would be stupid enough to try and pass them.
• Latest survey shows that 3 out of 4 people make up 75% of the world's population.
• The things that come to those that wait may be the things left by those who got there first.
• A fine is a tax for doing wrong. A tax is a fine for doing well.
• It was recently discovered that research causes cancer in rats.
• I wished the buck stopped here, as I could use a few.
• I started out with nothing, and I still have most of it.
• Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak
  

Feel free to add others in comments.

________________
Tags: Fallacy, Argument by Slogan.

Words worth espousing - recondite

This little-used word has a certain appeal for its precision of meaning, its utility for those concerned with argument (and detecting flaws in argument); and for those who wish to be seen as being in the possession of... well... um... recondite knowledge (sciolists and the like).

Recondite: Adjective ...(of a subject or knowledge) little known, abstruse.

It could fairly be said that informal fallacies in thinking is now a recondite domain of knowledge.

However in times past, it was a commonplace; a domain of knowledge which was part of the core curriculum in the classics and humanities.

Our grand plan here at humbugonline is to make fallacies in thinking less and less recondite, until wankers and delusional lunatics have nowhere to hide.

Faculty follies - redeployment option for senescent wackademic

Under the new staff agreement at my institution, there is no compulsory retirement age. Now I know for a fact that many hitherto mentally competent individuals go through a process of intellectual degeneration when they reach an advanced age - on the face of it therefore, no retirement at age 65 could be a problem. (Some academics are bound to lose their marbles before they retire at an advanced age.)

While I am an optimist, I do have a passing concern now and again as I rocket towards, and past 60, 65... and proceed towards my 8th decade. My concern? - will I still be able to hold down my job at the university when I get decrepit? If I go ga ga, will anyone notice?

It is a comfort to me that many of my colleagues in teacher education are ga ga anyway - and have always been so. So I would have to undergo significant degeneration before I stood out from the crowd. Not only that, but if I became really incapacitated - incoherent, babbling, drooling etc, I could simply be redeployed to another faculty and school. Humanities and cultural studies perhaps. I could hang out in such a setting for decades and not be noticed. I might even become something of an iconic celebrity intellectual. It has happened before.

Mr Lefty is worried

Whenever I venture to the top of a Slippery Slope, I get a little anxious. Mr Lefty does too:

The most powerful "democracy" in the world - is abandoning at least 700 years of legal principle and curtailing for certain non-citizens the fundamental writ of habeas corpus.

In other words, they don't have to bring you before a court now. They can just throw you in prison indefinitely without your ever being tried for any crime whatsoever. Hurrah!

And what will be the end result of this?

…western civilization degenerates into despotism...

In his next post he attempts to justify his Moral Equivalence:

Predictable condemnation in the comments to the last post at my daring to "morally equivalate" North Korea testing nukes and the US abandoning habeas corpus.

Well, here's why they're similar:

North Korea testing nukes is essentially an authoritarian despotist state taking some serious steps on the road to becoming a nuclear power. An authoritarian despotist state with nuclear weapons.

That's an accurate description of North Korea. Now, how to make the USA look the same? Build his own version out of straw:

The US abandoning habeas corpus is essentially a nuclear power taking some serious steps on the road to becoming an authoritarian despotist state. An authoritarian despotist state with nuclear weapons.

Ah, okay? What an illuminating analogy. But wait, there's more - he sure does love his Slippery Slope:

Obviously the US isn't an authoritarian despotist state right now. Sure, they're locking people up without charge, but only small numbers of them, and only foreigners who seem to have been involved in Bad Things. And they still have elections - not very democratic ones, given that the system devised effectively prevents any third party from ever having a chance to develop, but still, there's a choice, of sorts. So this chipping away at habeas corpus is only a step - a serious step, but they're not going to degenerate into Oceania so quickly that people would actually be spurred to rise up and stop them.
______________

Tags: Fallacy, Slippery slope, Moral equivalence, Straw man, False positioning, False analogy.

Another black Friday

As per usual on Friday the 13th, I tempted fate today by experimenting on myself in an attempt to rid a few students of their paraskavedekatriaphobia.

I committed a few common bad luck superstitions. Whilst walking under a ladder, I simultaneously opened an umbrella indoors and knocked over some salt. (Last year when I did the above I also smashed a mirror, I wasn't so organised this year.) I did it more than once for the benefit of all my classes.

As with last time, no bad luck to report. Perhaps doing them all at the same time cancels them out?
_______________

Tags: Skepticism, Superstition, Black Friday.

Ever wanted to hear what I sound like?

Well, go and download the podcast of the 45th skeptics' circle at inoculated mind.

Cat metaphor for sampling error

Commenter rhhardin over at Tim Blair's blog adds his two bits to a thread on the fanciful Lancet data on excess deaths in Iraq (comment No. 18)

It's a great metaphor for sampling error, and a handy generic put-down for dodgy sampling-based statistical research. I will use it often.

Sampling is used to find out what percentage of a cat is teeth. You poke a cat at random with a pin, and record the number of times you hit teeth, and the number of times you hit something else. Most people find it’s about 100% teeth, after a few samples.

This is then reported in journals.

I always knew this would happen, in hindsight anyway

I always knew that someone would eventually publish an article on the fallacy Postdiction, and I'd blog about it. The Washington Post - Iraq War Naysayers May Have Hindsight Bias - proves me right:

Antiwar liberals last week got to savor the four most satisfying words in the English language: "I told you so."

This was after a declassified National Intelligence Estimate asserted that the war in Iraq was creating more terrorists than it was eliminating. For millions of people who opposed President Bush's mission in Iraq from the start, this was proof positive that they had been right all along. Yes, they told themselves, we saw this disaster coming.

Only . . . that isn't quite true.

One of the most systematic errors in human perception is what psychologists call hindsight bias -- the feeling, after an event happens, that we knew all along it was going to happen. Across a wide spectrum of issues, from politics to the vagaries of the stock market, experiments show that once people know something, they readily believe they knew it all along.

Hence my inspiration for the addition of the fallacy Postdiction. More on hindsight bias:

This is not to say that no one predicted the war in Iraq would go badly, or that the insurgency would last so long. Many did. But where people might once have called such scenarios possible, or even likely, many will now be certain that they had known for sure that this was the only possible outcome.

….Baruch Fischhoff, a psychologist at Carnegie Mellon University and a pioneer in the field of hindsight bias, found that Americans who made estimates about their danger after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks recalled having made much lower estimates of risk a year later, after their fears failed to materialize.

Fischhoff testified about psychological factors in judgment at a meeting of the House intelligence committee last week.

However, that's not to say having some idea of a potential poor outcome was impossible:

While hindsight bias in the context of the Iraq war was real, the psychologist cautioned in an interview against misuse of the idea -- the argument by many supporters of the Bush administration that it was impossible to know ahead of time how the war would turn out.

The real question to ask is were they in the 'position to know' that this was a potential outcome, and if so, did they make reasonable decisions along the way?

Finally:

…people can fight the hindsight bias only when they honestly and systematically try to explain how different outcomes are possible. Such self-doubt is the exact opposite of how modern politics works: In the age of the blogosphere, certitude is king.

Without a doubt.
_____________

Tags: Fallacy, Postdiction, Hindsight bias.

Examples of Postdiction

The advocate claims that they accurately predicted an event after the fact, when in fact they did not, or have no evidence that they did.

• Astrology passes as news these days...
  
• I always knew this would happen, in hindsight anyway

Also known as hindsight bias, or 20/20 hindsight.

It's also worth mentioning that a good response to a claim of "I always knew", or "I told you so", is: "So what? What's your point? Do you want some kind of medal or certificate or something?"

If they are persistent, a slap in the face* is a good one too. Followed by: "Didn't see that one coming, did you?" (Then followed by running away...)

Other examples:

Parents who claim, after their child was born, that they “just knew it was a boy (or girl)” are most likely guilty of Postdiction. (I also suspect that people are right about the sex of their child about 50% of the time.)

And complete tool Uri Geller claimed to have been the cause of the Sydney Olympic cauldron flame stalling on its journey during the 2000 Olympic Games opening ceremony:

Geller said he had concentrated his mind to make the Olympic flame to get stuck as it was winched to the top of Stadium Australia during the opening ceremony.

He said he was at his home in Sonning-on-Thames near Reading in Britain, when he focused on the flame for 11 minutes as part of his vision of global nuclear disarmament.

Well that worked!

The crown of the Olympic cauldron stalled soon after being lit by Olympic athlete Cathy Freeman and rising out of a pool of water.

After an anxious wait of around three minutes, the cauldron was raised by hydraulic lift to its final position

________________
Tags: Skepticism, Fallacy, Postdiction, Hindsight bias.

* Disclaimer: as per usual, whenever I seemingly advocate the use of violence, it should be taken figuratively; a sad attempt at humour.

Website:
Share on Facebook
Podcast:

Love blossoms among the coffee tables

I was idly sketching patrons at one of my usual haunts (a local coffee shop) and reflecting on the human condition (specifically the blessings bestowed by a lack of self-awareness). My thoughts were prompted by the couple I was sketching. They were a singularly ill-favoured pair (the cartoon is based on my sketch) and yet they were animated, flirting and obviously engrossed in each other.

I made notes for a possible caption, and was about to put my sketchbook away, when to my horror, the couple rose and walked towards me. They looked over my shoulder at the sketch, and wondered aloud where I got my ideas for my cartoons. I quickly gained my self-composure and told a white lie. I said that the drawings of people were purely from my imagination, but that I hung out at a coffee lounge sketching in order to get general cartoon ideas, and background layouts. They looked about at the other customers to assess my bona fides, and clearly satisfied that I had not been drawing anyone present, they departed with a cheery wave.

After this narrow escape, I pondered once again the blessings bestowed by a lack of self-awareness. There would be no living in society without it.

Intelligently designed false analogy

I added this example to the wikipedia entry on False Analogy:

The False Analogy as espoused by William Paley and under its modern guise of intelligent design can be summarised as follows:

We have (A) complex machines which show structure and order. We have (B) a complex universe, natural world and 'biological machines' which also show structure and order. We know that (A) have been created by an intelligent designer (namely us), therefore it follows that (B) must have also been created by an intelligent designer (namely God). This argument could be rephrased as:

All the things in the world we know of, that have been intelligently designed, have certain properties which conclusively demonstrate they have been intelligently designed. It follows hen, that anything which also has these properties must also have been intelligently designed.

This is spurious. All we really know for certain is that humans made human artefacts. We don't know for sure that these other 'designed' things are the products of intelligence. This whole argument is circular, it Begs the Question. It assumes as its premise the conclusion it is trying to demonstrate. In essence it is saying: "Something that is designed has properties which show it was designed." This conclusion, though tautological, is acceptable. The next part of the argument is flawed: "Therefore something which shows these properties was intelligently designed."

All we know for sure, is that when humans design something, it inevitably has properties such as complexity, structure, purpose and order etc., but we cannot demonstrate that this reasoning applies in reverse, that complexity, structure, purpose and order, can only be the product of intelligent design. To do so assumes a priori, that objects which have properties such as complexity and purpose, are designed by an intelligence.
_____________
Tags: Fallacy, False Analogy, Begging the Question, Intelligent Design.

Congressional campaign = fallacy season

Gary Curtis over at The Fallacy Files spotted a great example of False Attribution in a congressional race in Iwoa, via FactCheck.org:

The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee spot, which aired on Sept 30…quotes Republican House candidate Mike Whalen saying, "we don’t have an energy problem."

Here's the actual quote in its full context:

Well, we don’t have an energy problem. We have a government problem. Government has stopped American oil and gas producers from drilling in large parts of this country. We have governmental policies that have stopped us from building clean nuclear energy. We have governmental policies that have stopped us from adopting clean coal technology. And we’ve had a government that hasn’t done enough, in my opinion, to really boost renewable fuels. So what we need to do in a lot of ways is recognize that our energy problem is a government problem.

And his stated position:

Ethanol and new bio-energy production facilities are good for Iowa and good for our security. Renewable energy is a critical part of the comprehensive effort I see as necessary for the country to accomplish true energy independence.

Not to be outdone, the Republicans Poison the Well:

The National Republican Congressional Committee's Sept 29 ad uses the guilt-by-distant-association tack to go after Democratic candidate Bruce Braley.

The ad tells us that Braley is supported by the Council for a Livable World, which has, indeed, endorsed him – but everything else the ad says about the group is either false, misleading or an ideological judgment call. The ad calls the Council "an ultra-liberal group who called for huge defense cuts." The text on the screen reads "advocates $130 billion in defense cuts."

The NRCC told FactCheck that this information came from a document authored by an offshoot of the Council in 1999, entitled "Potential Reductions in the Pentagon's 10-Year Budget."

From 1999? FactCheck goes on to point out that the Council for a Livable World say this information is not only outdated, but for the most, wrong. But as if this Well Poisoning wasn't enough:

The NRCC ad also tells us that Braley has been called a "peace candidate" by the Communist Party. That's true. The Party's newspaper, the People's Weekly World, gave the label to several Democratic candidates in an August issue. However, Braley didn't seek the Communists' support, and it's not even clear whether being called a "peace candidate" is the equivalent of an endorsement.

_______________
Hat tip Fallacy Files - Fact Check it out.

Tags: Fallacy, False Attribution, Poisoning the Well.

"Best of" section added

It's been a while, but I've finally created a best of Humbug! Online section (linked to on the sidebar). If you've the time, go and have a gander at stuff you may have missed.

Astrologer makes astoundingly unlikely yet precise prediction

What are the chances of this happening?

HONG Kong fortune tellers say the omens are bad for North Korea's nuclear standoff, claiming today that according to their readings of the stars Pyongyang is likely to test a bomb soon.

Amazing what the stars can "predict". Can you tell us when?

Feng shui geomancer and astrologer Yeung Tin-ming even goes so far as predict when - sometime between Saturday and November 4.

Wow! "Even" goes so far... What precision. In the next month? Really? No one else could have predicted that. Who might spark off the confrontation?

"He predicts there will be a confrontation in Northeastern Asia - Korea or Japan - that will result in the explosion of a nuclear weapon," said Mr Yeung's translator Amy Law.

Look Amy, I've even saved you the trouble of translation: 沒有胡扯Sherlock.*

I consulted my stars and predict they'll conduct the test in an abandoned coal mine.

UPDATE: I predict that you all know this already, but the astrologer and I were both right! My next prediction is that Japan won't go nuclear.
______________
* Don't bother translating it back to English. The meaning - "No s#!+ Sherlock" - is lost.

Tags: Skepticism, North Korea, Astrology.

Bishop's no ideology… ideology

From today's Australian - Canberra to seize syllabus from states:

Education Minister Julie Bishop will attack state education bureaucrats and accuse them of hijacking school curriculums:

"Some of the themes emerging in school curriculum are straight from Chairman Mao. We are talking serious ideology here," she will say.

In this one sentence we have a Straw Man, Unfounded Generalisation and False Attribution, - up there with the fallacy meister Phillip Adams - not bad! I have some sympathy with this view, but to put all state curricula into one basket is simplistic, to say the least. And Chairman Mao? (It's also rather disingenuous for Bishop to accuse current school curricula as being ideologically driven, as if she, a conservative politician, isn't.) Not once has Bishop backed up her claims, as far as I've seen (I looked through her recent press releases), by citing any syllabus statement verbatim. Pat Byrne, federal president of the Australian Education Union, makes the same point:

"She (Ms Bishop) is starting from a premise which simply does not exist," Ms Byrne said.

"She has no evidence to make such assertions.

I'm not saying Bishop isn't partially right, but she ought to give us some evidence. I'll help her out. Jef cited an example from the South Australian Science curriculum a while back:

Viewing experiences, ideas and phenomena through the lenses of diverse cultural sciences provide a breadth and depth of understanding that is not possible from any one cultural perspective. Every culture has its own ways of thinking and its own world views to inform its science. Western science is the most dominant form of science but it is only one form among the sciences of the world.

The Queensland Years 1-10 syllabus isn't quite that bad:

Humans are innately curious about their world. Science as a ‘way of knowing’ is used by people to explore and explain their experiences of phenomena of the universe. It is a process for constructing new knowledge. Science is part of the human quest for understanding and wisdom and reflects human wonder about the world. The study of science as a ‘way of knowing’ and a ‘way of doing’ can help students reach deeper understandings of the world.

This is all actually quite sound. However, if it's not taught in the right context (and historically), the message can be lost and students can be left with the wrong impression; they may even become irrational, pseudo-intellectuals. Science is a 'way of knowing' and 'doing'. As far as epistemology goes, it's the only rational way of knowing the real, physical world. I'm more than happy to compare it to other 'ways of knowing'.

From the same document:

Learners critically reflect on ways in which gender and cultural, racial and economic status affect access to information, careers, life chances and opportunities in the fields of science. They actively participate as informed citizens, exercising stewardship of the environment and acknowledging human responsibility for the impact of the practices of science.

This is right too. There are still issues with equality in science, such as publishing papers, funding and employment. (I teach in a girls' school, so I'm doing my bit.) Science (through technology) does have an impact on the world - just ask Kim Jong-il.

In saying all that, to fully understand this requires fairly advanced ideas in the history and philosophy of science. This can be done with students to a certain extent, at an age appropriate level, so long as the teacher has the required background (I do of course...). (BTW - teachers are very much pragmatists. I've taught in the UK and Australia, and the way I teach potential difference, say, or Newton's laws, hasn't changed one iota except from experience - what works, and what doesn't - and the need to adapt to different clientele.)

Moving back to Bishop, I particularly enjoyed this:

"How is that we have gone from teaching Latin in Year 12 to teaching remedial English in first-year university?" she says.

Don't you love it when people pretend a rhetorical question actually makes a good point? (Irony intended.) Anyway, wats rong wid dat? Eye meself neaded hepl wif me inglesh… quod erat demonstrandum (yet more irony).

Bishop does raise this point which I agree with:

"The curriculum must be challenging, aiming for high standards, and not accepting the lowest common denominator.

"It seems we are lowering the educational bar to make sure everyone gets over it, not raising it to aspire to excellence."

And this too:

This would also remove the duplication of effort and resources currently spent by states developing individual curriculums.

She says the states and territories collectively spend more than $180 million running their boards of studies and curriculum councils to develop very similar curriculums in identical subjects.

"There are currently nine different year 12 certificates across Australia, each backed by separate curriculum developed by eight different education authorities," she says.

"Is it necessary for each state to develop a separate curriculum?

"Do we need to have a physics curriculum developed for Queensland, and another, almost identical physics curriculum for Western Australia?

No we don't, (one would hope they're almost identical) but they should use our (Queensland) syllabus… which leads me to a slight problem Julie's overlooked. My school is currently running the Trial Pilot syllabus for Physics, which has required a great amount of work from myself and the other physics teachers (the work program, assessment items, unit outlines, etc.) - in particular the Head of Department. (Not to mention the other senior science subjects and the junior program.)

If a national syllabus was to come in, in the next 5 years or so, rather than have to go through all that work again I will simply quit and become an electrician or something (they make about twice as much as me anyway). Reinventing the wheel occurs far too frequently in education. I'd be willing to bet that many other teachers feel the same.

On top of that, the work program and assessment we do is of a very high standard. All senior assessment and work programs in Queensland go to 'the panel' for monitoring, moderation and verification. The work produced by my students is excellent. They are required to delve far deeper into practical and conceptual aspects of physics than I ever had to, 'back in the day'. And I'll beat anyone down who says otherwise…
___________
Here's the full transcript of the speech Bishop gave today.

Tags: Education, Fallacy, Straw Man, Unfounded Generalization, False Attribution, Science.

Bartlett v Schwarten

Andrew Bartlett (Australian Democrat senator for those who don’t know) is engaged in a bit of political biffo with a Queensland government minister at the moment. Rob Schwarten (pictured trying to avoid eye-contact with "Bulldog" Bartlett), the Minister of Public Works and Housing, is threatening to cut funding to mistreated public housing.

Bartlett makes some good points, but then goes a False Analogy:

It all reeks to me of a parent trying to punish a naughty child and cutting off their money until they ‘learn their lesson’.

Not really. It's more like trying to have some kind of real consequence for vandalism (not that I'm endorsing it or saying it'll work mind you). He follows that up with some Motive Impugning:

…Personally, I think taking the trouble to work in an ongoing way with the Council is preferable to either of those, even if does take more work and doesn’t go play so well in the media.

Not to be outdone, Schwarten responds in a churlish manner, and accuses Bartlett of Burdening him with the Solution (somewhat ironic, given he is the Minister of Public Works and Housing, the solution is his job…).

“Senator Bartlett is good at whingeing but when it comes to offering up solutions to rampant violence, vandalism, overcrowding and destruction of public facilities, he has no answers,” Mr Schwarten said.

“Simply bobbing up for a whinge and nothing else every now and again might make the Democrats feel all warm and fuzzy but it doesn’t stop crime, it doesn’t put a roof over people’s heads and it doesn’t help stop unchecked vandalism.”

You tread a fine line when accusing someone of the Burden of Solution. I don't think it's reasonable to accuse Bartlett of this, in this instance. Bartlett's media release continues:

“That housing Minister Robert Schwarten is meeting with the council today is a step in the right direction, but open communication and consultation with the community to address problems should have been happening long before now.”

...Senator Bartlett visited Woorabinda on Monday and met with the council and community members.

“There has been some progress in aspects of housing management in the community in recent times and this action risks reversing that progress,” Senator Bartlett concluded.

Not much of a solution admittedly, but it's a very complicated problem.

The "feel all warm and fuzzy…" remark made by Schwarten refers to the partner of the Burden of Solution - Sanctimony. I wouldn't accuse Bartlett of Sanctimony, but it is a label that is often deserved of those with left-wing leanings (look at our examples). (Right-wingers are too busy having money fights and shooting their guns at stuff to have time to feel all warm and fuzzy.)
__________

Tags: Fallacy, False analogy, Impugning motives, Burden of solution.

The ultimate False Attribution

It's official - False Attribution has been given a special page all to itself on wikipedia, as a fallacy. How do I know this? I put it there myself…

I present the Ultimate False Attribution:

Without any disclosure, the advocate refers back to himself or herself as a reputable source to backup his or her own claim. Thus the advocate is actually Begging the Question.

I wonder if it'll last, or will some narky editor delete it… LOL.
______________

Tags: Fallacy, False Attribution, Begging the Question, Wikipedia.

A healthy democracy

This is how it used to go down in the House of Reps (aka the lower house). Paul Keating (pictured thinking up another gem), the Prime Minister before the current fellow, was the master of ad hominem. From the Paul Keating Insults Archive:

On former Liberal and Opposition Leader (now Prime Minister), John Howard:

"What we have got is a dead carcass, swinging in the breeze, but nobody will cut it down to replace him." "...the brain-damaged Leader of the Opposition..." "I am not like the Leader of the Opposition. I did not slither out of the Cabinet room like a mangy maggot..."

On Wilson "Iron Bar" Tuckey (Liberal politician):

"...You stupid foul-mouthed grub." "Shut up! Sit down and shut up, you pig!" "You boxhead you wouldn't know. You are flat out counting past ten."

On Former Leader of the Opposition, John Hewson:

"(His performance) is like being flogged with a warm lettuce." "I was implying that the Honorable Member for Wentworth was like a lizard on a rock - alive, but looking dead. " "I have a psychological hold over Hewson...He's like a stone statue in the cemetery. " "I'd put him in the same class as the rest of them: mediocrity."

On former Liberal Party Leader and Shadow Treasurer, Andrew Peacock:

"...if this gutless spiv, and I refer to him as a gutless spiv..." "...the Leader of the Opposition's inane stupidities." "He could not rise above his own opportunism or his incapacity to lead." "I suppose tha the Honourable Gentleman's hair, like his intellect, will recede into th darkness." "The Leader of the Opposition is more to be pitied than despised, the poor old thing." "The Liberal Party ought to put him down like a faithful dog because he is of no use to it and of no use to the nation." "We're not interested in the views of painted, perfumed gigolos." "It is the first time the Honourable Gentleman has got out from under the sunlamp." "...a fop such as the present Leader of the Opposition."

Gold.
____________

Tags: Fallacy, ad hominem, personal abuse.

Looking after one of the boys - Solomons' style

An example of Impugning Motives (of Australia!) from the Prime Minister of the Solomon Islands:

The Solomons' Prime Minister has questioned Australia's motivation in trying to extradite Julian Moti from Papua New Guinea, describing the action as a serious violation of sovereignty.

I don't think that's why he's doing it, protecting the sovereignty of the Solomons my arse… I think his underlying motive is "jobs for the boys":

Solomon Islands speaker Sir Peter Kenilorea says procedures were not followed in the appointment of the new attorney general Julian Moti, Solomon Islands Broadcasting Corporation reports

…He said although the Prime Minister Manasseh Sogavare has the right to recommend candidates for the post, the position was not vacant or advertised.

Sir Peter said advertising the position would have been the normal procedure which would have given a chance for other qualified local lawyers to apply.

Sogavare is so motivated to help his oldmate Moti out - he doesn't care what Moti has been accused of:

…Moti, who is a close personal friend of Mr Sogavare, was arrested at Australia's request as he tried to return to the Solomons to take up the attorney-general's post.

Australia has repeatedly denied having a political motive for pursuing Moti, who is wanted over the alleged sexual assault of a 13-year-old girl in Vanuatu in 1997.

An alleged kiddie-fiddler? He's going to stand in the way of an alleged kiddie-fiddling rapist being prosecuted?

It was alleged he abused the girl, the daughter of a Vanuatu business associate, over a six-month period.

... the Court of Appeal threw out the case on two technicalities: the indictment had the wrong age of the alleged victim and the magistrate failed to give Mr Moti the right to rebut the evidence before committing him to stand trial.

Did I forget to mention dodgy?

It is understood the case was then returned to be heard before another magistrate, who later dismissed the case amid allegations he was paid off by Mr Moti.

Ah, justice at work...

UPDATE: Moti has been suspended as Solomons' Attorney-General and has fled with the blessing on the Papua New Guinea PM:

The Solomon Islands Attorney-General, Julian Moti, has been suspended from his job on the orders of the country's Chief Justice.

Mr Moti has spent much of this week in the Solomon Islands High Commission building in Port Moresby as Australian officials sought to extradite him to face child sex charges.

Earlier today, Mr Moti left the building after Papua New Guinea (PNG) Prime Minister Sir Michael Somare said he was free to leave.

________________

Tags: Fallacy, Impugning Motives.

Nunchuks - cool but useless

A phrase which popped up in a recent episode of The Simpsons had an immediate appeal for me. It succinctly stated what we all really know, but few of us bother to draw attention to.

Nunchuks - cool but useless

That is: (a) nunchuks are completely useless (as weapons); but (b) they look cool when whirled about by a menacing martial arts wanker (only in a movie). It seems to me that many artifacts of popular culture could be so described, and I encourage further suggestions. Some examples to be going on with...

Baseball caps worn back to front: cool but useless.
Stiletto heels: cool but useless.
Hipster jeans: cool but useless.
Personal trainers: cool but useless.
Nose rings: cool but useless (except on bullocks)
Minimalist abstract paintings: cool but useless.
Ephemeral art installations: cool but useless.
Boob tubes: cool but useless.
Dreadlocks: cool but useless.
Blank verse poetry readings: cool but useless.
Hair gel: cool but useless.
Backless cafe chairs: cool but useless.

Neo-Lysenkofeminism

Janet Albrechtsen gives the thumbs up for a book which debunks myths perpetrated by some feminists driven by ideology rather than the search for the truth:

ONLY a girl could write The Female Brain and walk away with life and reputation intact. This new book may be contentious, but in fact modern science is merely playing catch-up with what we know intuitively. Girls are different from boys.

…But here's the really brave bit: the unisex brain is a feminist fabrication. Louann Brizendine, an American neuro-psychiatrist, has written a book debunking stubborn notions that girls are different only because society makes them so. It's much more to do with the brain, she says. The female brain, to be more precise.

…Drawing upon advances in gene technology and brain-imaging techniques that have revolutionised neuro-scientific research, Brizendine presents a heady cocktail of structural, chemical, genetic, hormonal and functional differences between women and men.

…there is plenty that will upset the old bra-burning feminists who steadfastly refuse to allow biology to get in the way of ideology. Let's start with how girls choose a mate. According to Brizendine, "our (female) brains size up a potential partner, and if he fits our ancestral wish list, we get a jolt of chemicals that dizzy us with a rush of laser-focused attention".

This ideology of which Albrechtsen refers is based on quite a few fallacies. However, these three - Wishful Thinking, Argument to Consequences and the Naturalistic Fallacy - are the ones that spring to mind (they are very similar too).

Wishful Thinking is the most obvious. People who still claim that the general differences between male and female humans are predominantly environmental wish it were this way, so they still claim it is this way, against the plethora of scientific evidence to the contrary.

An Argument to Consequences is also often invoked. It cannot be true that biology is the cause of behavioural difference as it ought not be true, as this could mean that men are inherently better (on average) at some things than women (and vice-versa of course). And that would mean men and women are not equal.

Note that the argument to consequences is almost the exact opposite of the Naturalistic Fallacy. These particular Neo-Lysenkoists do not make the Naturalistic Fallacy themselves, but they are worried that others will, if it turns out there is a difference. Ie, it is true that there are differences (again, on average) between males and females, therefore there ought to be (in terms of how they are treated and their respective roles in society).

These ideas are simply wrong. And here's a valid argument to consequences - basing public policy on flawed assumptions screws things up. Just read this wikipedia entry on Lysenkoism, or, as Albrechtsen points out:

…Ignoring the differences, and framing public policy on a pretence that women are something they are not only ends up hurting women. For instance, in the heady days of 1970s feminism, it was assumed that universal child care would free women to achieve true equality with men. We now know that many women would prefer not to outsource the raising of their children. And so we need public policy and workplace changes that recognise that biological drive.

A very similar point was made in one of my earliest posts on the blog.

Two final points.

1) No one seems to argue that physical abilities are genetically predisposed (like being a fast swimmer), yet apparently, to some, personality and intelligence aren't. I've news for those people, brain tissue is just as physical as bone and muscle tissue.

2) Much of the misunderstanding stems from a lack of understanding of basic biology, in particular human evolution, and a seemingly deliberate denial of our animal nature. We have no problems with sex differences in other species being genetic, other than our own. A good place to start with is parental investment and from that, sexual selection. I highly recommend Matt Ridley's The Red Queen (and pretty much all his books).

_________
Note that I haven't read the book (The Female Brain), so it could be crap... But my points still remain.

Tags: Fallacy, Wishful Thinking, Argument to Consequences, Naturalistic Fallacy.