User:Concernedresident/statementfromconversion

A statement from conversion is an argument used in which the author cites their earlier acceptance of the opposing position and their subsequent "conversion". This technique is seen in religious debates, from believers and non-believers alike. The statement typically takes the form: "I used to believe x, but now know y to be the correct position." Such statements are typically used to lend authority to an argument, but the validity hinges on the author providing logical reasons to explain why they abandoned the position and also evidence that their prior position was itself genuine and consistent with what is under discussion.

Common fallacies associated with this argument
The entire statement and the experience and credentials of the author must be considered when determining whether or not the statement is fallacious. It is, of course, possible that the individual really did begin with one point of view and later reviewed all the evidence which led to them changing their minds: on the other hand it may simply be a ploy which the debater is using to claim apparent superior knowledge.

Argument from authority
A statement that pretty much states "I used to believe 'x' and so I know what I'm talking about" is really an argument from authority and would normally be considered a logical fallacy. The actual experience and credentials of the author are relevant,but do not in themselves mean that everything everything a physicist says on the subject of physics should be accepted.

Strawman argument
A strawman argument is seen when the position formerly claimed by the author does not accurately represent the position they are arguing against. An example of this is found in atheists citing their previously held religious beliefs as a authority for their argument against religion, yet their beliefs were not comparable that which is being discussed. To better understand this, imagine a former liberal Christian who only attended church for weddings and funerals, and has never properly studied scripture, comparing their former belief to that held by a fervent cult member who spends their free time studying scripture and packing their suitcase in readiness for the rapture.

The same approach is seen in reverse, when Kirk Cameron argues against atheism, in part, by referencing his former status as a "devout atheist". The strawman in this example is Cameron's atheism.

Argument from personal experience
The argument from personal experience takes the form of anecdotes and personal testimonials. Such arguments are unconvincing in the same sense that revelation tends to be a personal event witnessed by few and of no value to anyone unable to witness it.