"Bulverism"

One of the most frequent logical fallacies out there today is the “genetic fallacy.” A “genetic fallacy” is when you judge an argument by its source (“genetics”), not by its content. C.S. Lewis spoke of this mistake in logic in his book, God in The Dock. Lewis coined the term, “Bulverism,” named after a fictional character in the book, Ezekiel Bulver. Lewis said it this way, “You must show that a man is wrong before you start explaining why he is wrong.”

We see genetic fallacies all the time. I use them. You use them. They are hard to escape. Take the Swift boat issue, for example. The lead man criticizing Senator Kerry, John O’Neil, was immediately cast as a pawn of President Bush’s campaign, and what he, and several hundred other Swift boat vets, said, couldn’t be trusted. This is a genetic fallacy. First, you would refute the details of everything these men testified against before you would disparage who they were. In the case of O’Neil it wasn’t logical to dismiss him as a lackey of the Republican Party to begin with, anyway. For example, he supported Al Gore in 2000.

Some of the Swift Boat criticism was accurate, according to Senator Kerry’s own campaign. Some of it was inaccurate. Whether we will ever get to the bottom of the truth vs. propaganda aspect of the Swift Boat Vets is uncertain. The election is over and we aren’t likely to hear much more. But “Bulverism” is alive and well. Tomorrow I will visit the concept of genetic fallacy again.