Become an active member of our fallacy-discussing community (or just become a lurker!)
(also known as: spinning)
Description: Presenting information in a deceptive way that results in others interpreting the information in such a way that does not reflect reality but is how you want the information to be interpreted.
Logical Form:
X represents reality.
Information is presented in such a way that Y appears to represent reality.
Example #1:
Senator Elizabeth Warren was recently under attack because it was discovered that the men on her staff were paid, on average, considerably more than the women on her staff—an issue that Warren has campaigned on many times. While the facts are true (men are paid more on her staff), in many analyses, relevant data was excluded such as the criteria necessary to prove the claim that women on Senator Warren's staff were paid less than their male counterparts for equivalent work [1]. In fairness to some conservative outlets that reported this story, some used this as an example to show that there is more to the story than just raw numbers.
Example #2:
Simon: It is pretty darn clear that God is against homosexuality. According to Leviticus 20:13, “If a man lies with a male as with a woman, both of them shall be put to death for their abominable deed; they have forfeited their lives.”
Bret: You don't understand. This was before Jesus. After Jesus, God was okay with it. Besides, these were specific instructions to a specific people during a specific historical period.
Explanation: Very often, people's ideas of God are a result of their values, not the other way around. This is made clear by the cultural shifts on moral issues that correlate with people's interpretation of the Bible (one example being Christian's views on homosexuality). Bret may genuinely believe his narrative, but it was most likely a result of the spin doctoring of another person or organization.
Exception: They are situations where there is no objective truth to a view and data can be looked at in multiple ways, such as the classic "is the glass half-full or half-empty" question.
Tip: Consider the source's biases. This will help with detecting spin doctoring.
References:
This a logical fallacy frequently used on the Internet. No academic sources could be found.
1 Elizabeth Warren Pays Female Staffers Less Than Their Male Counterparts? (2017, April 6). Retrieved April 13, 2017, from http://www.snopes.com/elizabeth-warren-staff-pay/
Questions about this fallacy? Ask our community!
Uncomfortable Ideas: Facts don't care about feelings. Science isn't concerned about sensibilities. And reality couldn't care less about rage.
This is a book about uncomfortable ideas—the reasons we avoid them, the reasons we shouldn’t, and discussion of dozens of examples that might infuriate you, offend you, or at least make you uncomfortable.
Many of our ideas about the world are based more on feelings than facts, sensibilities than science, and rage than reality. We gravitate toward ideas that make us feel comfortable in areas such as religion, politics, philosophy, social justice, love and sex, humanity, and morality. We avoid ideas that make us feel uncomfortable. This avoidance is a largely unconscious process that affects our judgment and gets in the way of our ability to reach rational and reasonable conclusions. By understanding how our mind works in this area, we can start embracing uncomfortable ideas and be better informed, be more understanding of others, and make better decisions in all areas of life.
Get 20% off this book and all Bo's books*. Use the promotion code: websiteusers
* This is for the author's bookstore only. Applies to autographed hardcover, audiobook, and ebook.
