MikeC
Closed Account
By Brian Dunning on Skeptic Blog
I take it as a sign that they've run out of actual arguments and facts!
It seems to me that this is not confined to GMO and related issues - it is a common meme across all conspiracies that is quickly trotted out by believers - "Who/how much are you paid/by?" - whether it be Monsanto, of the Govt, or the generic "The Powers That Be" (TPTB) this line of attack/defence is never far from the keyboard of some believer or other.It’s my favorite new logical fallacy, the “Appeal to Monsanto”, the world’s largest producer of biotech agriculture seeds. This is the logic that compels many anti-GMO activists to reply to any argument in support of biotech crops with “So you love Monsanto?”
It’s so wonderful because it combines many other logical fallacies into one, and is thus a great time saver. For example:
◾It poisons the well (cloaks a viewpoint with negative weasel words) by associating the scary, evil word Monsanto.
◾It’s a non-sequitur (a logical association that does not follow). IF (a) THEREFORE (b). IF (genes can be used to confer traits such as drought resistance) THEREFORE (I love Monsanto).
◾It’s a straw man (misrepresenting what I said into something that’s easy to argue against). If I had actually said “I love Monsanto”, then plenty of rational arguments are available to show that’s a bad idea.
◾It’s an ad hominem attack on my argument (the argument is wrong because of who the person is that made it). Whatever I said about biotech must be wrong since “I love Monsanto”.
◾It’s a red herring (an irrelevancy to distract from the subject under discussion). Monsanto does not necessarily have anything to do with any given science-based discussion of the merits of what can and should be done with direct genetic manipulation.
I take it as a sign that they've run out of actual arguments and facts!
