Appeal to fiction

From RationalWiki
Revision as of 16:06, 9 July 2019 by Oxyaena (talk | contribs) (Reverted edits by 74.131.109.126 (talk) to last revision by Bongolian)
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Cogito ergo sum
Logic and rhetoric
Icon logic.svg
Key articles
General logic
Bad logic

An appeal to fiction (also generalizing from fictional evidence) is a logical fallacy that occurs when someone makes claims about reality based on evidence drawn from works of fiction.

Explanation

Fiction is not reality — it is driven in large part by considerations of being interesting to the audience rather than reflecting reality with 100% accuracy. Furthermore, fiction shows systemic bias in its distortion of reality; common deviations for the audience's benefit are catalogued and studied as tropes. Using fiction to argue about reality can therefore systematically skew your beliefs and expectations.

Example

  • This tactic was deployed by Supreme Court justice Antonin Scalia when he justified the use of torture on terrorism suspects by citing the television show 24[1] as evidence, stating "Is any jury going to convict Jack Bauer? I don't think so."[2]
  • Just about anything to do with 1984.

See also

External links

  1. 24 IMDb.
  2. Scalia and Torture (Jun 19, 2007) by Andrew Sullivan The Atlantic.