It happened again.. Citgo logic

Once again, "Citgo" logic struck me today.

You may wonder - what IS Citgo logic?

Of course, it's something I made up in the moment.  It's a type of email or other communication that's been going around since those who don't squint discovered email and internet access.  You've gotten about ten of them this week - telling you that George Soros is actually a reincarnated Mayan devil who's controlling the Jewish hegemony over 9/11 records.

They are deeply flawed, both on the basis of logic and on the basis of fact.  They are an appeal to emotion and they BECOME TRUTH because of incessant repetition.

The subject of this one just happened to be Citgo.  The good folks over at Snopes.com have debunked it quite thoroughly, but you should click on it and read their stuff.

Don't worry, I'll wait until you finish.

All right.  So, you read it, yes?  You've probably had it in your "in" box at some point.

What's wrong with it?  Well, factually, there's very little there.  Blah blah blah "Chavez is a bad man", blah blah blah "punish him for being bad to his people", blah blah blah "And now he's got GUNS" blah blah blah "And Iranian OIL DEVELOPERS".

In the Universities where I teach logic review classes, we have a "dirty dozen" of common logic fallacies.

Logic fallacies, because they are presented to persuade, the structure doesn't lead to the conclusion, and yet they're believed to be persuasive.

Motivated by the questions raised in classes, and by this email I received, I resolved to write a post about this common form of persuasive badgering.

Badgering - it's an analogy - meaning, that it's used to describe human behavior even though it's clearly about badgers.  Badgers are predatory omnivores that are known for their fierce and tenacious defensive behavior.  They will attack, attack, attack and press regardless of the odds against them.

Humans, who verbally harass, press the point, attack attack attack, are said to be "badgering".

Persons who forward emails of this nature are doing so to bait a response, and it's quite fair to call this behavior "badgering".

Now, when one responds to such an email or communication (p.s., NEVER do this if it's someone you care about maintaining a relationship with) to discuss it .. say, rationally .. you may reasonably expect that the badger will strike from within their underground lair with the savageness that they are known for.

For some persons (probably those wearing hunting togs and riding expensive horses) this could be considered sporting.

However, for someone who's just trying to make sense of the world, or someone who's avoiding the drama and trying to live life mindfully, this is not sport.  It's wildly dramatic and unwelcome, especially when one is certain that the sender (badger) knows full well that the email broadside will be unwelcome and will serve to create discordant discourse.

Let's go back to the Citgo email (as an example):

• Citgo is indeed 100% owned by PDVesa, the state owned oil company of Venezuela.  
• Citgo was owned by PDVesa for nearly ten years before Chavez was ELECTED the President of that country
• Citgo has had a nearly 100 year history in the US as a refining and marketing brand
• Venezuela has had a long history of wealth and power concentration that has brought pain to its common citizens and many fruits to those wealthy and powerful
• Venezuela does have a gun factory
• Venezuela has created an exploration deal with an Iranian company
• Chavez has often objected to US diplomacy and militarism, and has been a loud voice among dozens who seek to create an alternative to US domination
• Lots of Americans think that this is evil, wrong and that we should blow them up

Now, the email suggests, based on the above, that all good and patriotic Americans should cease purchasing gas from Citgo.  The assertion is that every dollar spent at a Citgo station will be used by the government of Venezuela.

Depending on whether you're a "patriotic" American, or a "liberal", you're either sending this email to suggest that you buy or boycott.

First point - the identical information is used to support "buy" and "boycott", depending on one's axe needing ground.

Second point, the entire argument is a fallacy - the fallacy of ad populum.  It also smacks of proof by verbosity, which is a common technique used by those who badger.  Should one reject the argument in any manner, one can be assured of a vigorous collection of statements ad hominem, i.e., personal insults.

If the common discourse in this country could be fact based and logically sound, most of the finger pointing would cease.

Given the predilection for such behaviors, I suspect that there will be far more cessation of relationships.