Facts, Fights, Fallacies, and Fun

Logic and rhetoric seem to of had enough of each other. Maybe not literally but it seems they are two different things. Logic tries to prove the right and wrong, giving the audience and the adversary straight answers. On the other hand, rhetoric gives the audience choices that are more susceptible for persuasion. Heinrichs makes this clear and directly introduces a new set of fallacies that run under these differences. These fallacies can distract a debate or turn into a fight.

Logical fallacies such as a person using facts against you instead of the topic, stating he can't be wrong because other people think so or the famous one because they have been believing it for a long time *cough* religion *cough* *cough*. Another fallacy Heinrichs goes into is the fallacy of power, "because the guy in charge wants it, this fallacy says, it must be good." (157). When you spot these fallacies you might end up fighting. To avoid getting stuck or using these fallacies it's good to use the present tense as it gives choices to the audience. "It's okay to use sermonizing, demonstrative rhetoric in a deliberative argument to get the audience on his side, but then the persuader should instantly switch to the future tense" (163). I mentioned in previous blogs about values and the present tense. It can be deadly to always be in the present as it will make your arguments harder to bring forward to audiences.

What your left with are discussions with asses. Literally. In this Family Guy scene the discussion is in present tense. The man is using logical fallacies, that work, to prove a point. Instead, the ass (sorry for my obscene words) is using his facts to attack the man instead of the topic and is also, what Heinrichs calls, "utter stupidity." The man is arguing against a fool.
Maybe, if the man used his rhetoric in future tense, the discussion would of not ended with so many NOs.