Question

...
Kris

Fallacy?

How can “science” tell you where to draw the line between bad behavior and sickness? If a therapist is to remain neutral in values, then why should one state of mind be considered preferable to another? If guilt is sometimes a misguided neurosis and at other times a proper response to wrongdoing, who decides, and by what authority? 

asked on Wednesday, Jan 15, 2025 12:52:30 AM by Kris

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."

Eat Meat... Or Don't.

Roughly 95% of Americans don’t appear to have an ethical problem with animals being killed for food, yet all of us would have a serious problem with humans being killed for food. What does an animal lack that a human has that justifies killing the animal for food but not the human?

As you start to list properties that the animal lacks to justify eating them, you begin to realize that some humans also lack those properties, yet we don’t eat those humans. Is this logical proof that killing and eating animals for food is immoral? Don’t put away your steak knife just yet.

In Eat Meat… Or Don’t, we examine the moral arguments for and against eating meat with both philosophical and scientific rigor. This book is not about pushing some ideological agenda; it’s ultimately a book about critical thinking.

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

...
Mr. Wednesday
3

I would consider this argument of the beard . On one extreme, you have some mental illnesses that have a clear physical cause that shows up in a brain scan, and/or puts them in a mental state where they truly cannot control their actions or are totally out of touch with reality. On the other hand, many mental illnesses are diagnosed by psychologists just based on their perceptions of the patient's thoughts, feelings, and behaviors. For a lot of people with mental illnesses, it can pressure them towards certain behaviors, but doesn't totally rob them of agency. While it's not totally objective, the American Psychiatric Association publishes a manual on how to diagnose mental illnesses. Part of it is criteria for individual illnesses, but also a more general definition that states that the symptoms must be abnormal, which is a judgement that can be made based on data, and must inhibit a person's ability to do things like function in a job or society. And part of that is accpeting that a therapist can't be completely neutral, as societal expectations are an integral part of how they make their evaluations.
answered on Wednesday, Jan 15, 2025 02:06:48 PM by Mr. Wednesday

Mr. Wednesday Suggested These Categories

Comments
...
0
AI Fallacy Master writes:
The student's answer identifies the "argument of the beard" fallacy, which is relevant to the original question. This fallacy occurs when someone argues that because no precise boundary can be drawn between two extremes, no meaningful distinction exists. In this context, the original question suggests that because it is difficult to define a clear boundary between "bad behavior" and "sickness," the distinction is problematic.

The student's answer then goes on to address the complexity of diagnosing mental illnesses, acknowledging that while some mental illnesses have identifiable physical causes, others are diagnosed based on subjective assessments. This illustrates the spectrum of mental health issues and the challenges involved in categorizing them.

The student also highlights the role of the American Psychiatric Association and its diagnostic manual, which provides criteria for diagnosing mental illnesses. This point helps to refute the implication that there is no authoritative basis for distinguishing between mental illness and other forms of behavior, even though elements of subjectivity remain in such assessments.

The mention that therapists cannot be completely neutral due to societal influences is an important acknowledgment of the complexities involved in psychological evaluations, which often involve subjective judgments.

Overall, the student's answer effectively addresses the logical issues presented in the original question and provides a balanced perspective on the complexities of mental illness diagnosis without falling into logical fallacies or cognitive biases itself.
posted on Wednesday, Jan 15, 2025 02:06:54 PM
...
AI Fallacy Master
0
The passage presents several questions that suggest skepticism about the role of science and therapy in making value-laden judgments. Below are some logical fallacies and reasoning issues evident in the passage:

1. **Equivocation Fallacy**: The passage uses the term "science" ambiguously. Science in itself does not dictate moral or ethical distinctions such as those between bad behavior and sickness. Scientific findings might inform these distinctions based on evidence about human health and behavior, but they do not inherently make value judgments.

2. **False Dichotomy**: The passage implies that therapists either remain completely value-neutral or dictate states of mind without any clear criteria. This overlooks the possibility that therapists might use evidence-based practices to guide individuals in personal development while still maintaining a professional detachment from imposing personal values.

3. **Appeal to Authority Fallacy**: The passage questions the "authority" by which scientific or therapeutic decisions are made, but fails to acknowledge that in many cases, these decisions are based on a collective understanding within the scientific and psychological communities, grounded in rigorous research and peer-reviewed studies.

4. **Loaded Question**: The questions presume a problematic scenario, such as science overstepping its bounds or therapists lacking authority to make such decisions, without providing evidence for these premises.

5. **Slippery Slope**: There is an implicit suggestion that if science or therapy can make distinctions about mental states, it might lead to arbitrary or unfounded value judgments, although no clear connection or evidence is presented to support this outcome.

Overall, the passage reflects skepticism about the role of science and therapy in moral and ethical judgments, but it leans on several logical fallacies and a questioning tone without addressing how practical guidelines and ethical standards are developed and applied in these fields.
answered on Wednesday, Jan 15, 2025 12:52:56 AM by AI Fallacy Master

AI Fallacy Master Suggested These Categories

Comments