Question

...
Jason Mathias

Is the conclusion "We shall see" a fallacy, or a bias?

Example:

P1: Evidence against thing X exists. 

P2: I like thing X. 

P3: I believe evidence will come out absolving thing X. 

C: Therefore, we shall see. 

Or when someone always ends a conversation with, "we shall see" only after evidence has falsified their beliefs.

It seems to be an appeal to faith in order to continue holding onto one's beliefs. 

asked on Friday, Sep 22, 2023 02:09:42 PM by Jason Mathias

Top Categories Suggested by Community

Comments

Want to get notified of all questions as they are asked? Update your mail preferences and turn on "Instant Notification."

Reason: Books I & II

This book is based on the first five years of The Dr. Bo Show, where Bo takes a critical thinking-, reason-, and science-based approach to issues that matter with the goal of educating and entertaining. Every chapter in the book explores a different aspect of reason by using a real-world issue or example.

Part one is about how science works even when the public thinks it doesn't. Part two will certainly ruffle some feathers by offering a reason- and science-based perspective on issues where political correctness has gone awry. Part three provides some data-driven advice for your health and well-being. Part four looks at human behavior and how we can better navigate our social worlds. In part five we put on our skeptical goggles and critically examine a few commonly-held beliefs. In the final section, we look at a few ways how we all can make the world a better place.

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.

Get the Book

Answers

...
TrappedPrior (RotE)
3

RationalWiki refers to this as the 'escape to the future'. Dr Bo refers to this as the 'argument to the future'.

P1) There is no evidence for X

P2) In the future, however, there will be evidence for X

C) X is true.

The problem is in P2). How do you even know there will be evidence for X in the future? This is a claim that itself requires evidence. 

Taking out P2), we are left with P1) and C). "There is no evidence for X" -> "X is true"; an obvious non sequitur. Specifically, it could be an appeal to faith, or wishful thinking

The above analysis assumes one has no reasons to believe that there will be evidence absolving X in the future.

answered on Friday, Sep 22, 2023 04:24:12 PM by TrappedPrior (RotE)

TrappedPrior (RotE) Suggested These Categories

Comments

...
1
Jason Mathias writes:

Awesome answer! Thanks!

posted on Friday, Sep 22, 2023 05:56:25 PM