DOCSLIB.ORG

The Speculative Influence of Academic Research on the Making of Communications Policy: Reflections, Recollections and Informal Perspectives

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Speculative Influence of Academic Research on the Making of Communications Policy: Reflections, Recollections and Informal Perspectives University of Pennsylvania ScholarlyCommons Other Publications from the Center for Global Center for Global Communication Studies Communication Studies (CGCS) 2-2008 The Speculative Influence of Academic Research on the Making of Communications Policy: Reflections, Recollections and Informal Perspectives Monroe Price University of Pennsylvania, [email protected] Stefaan Verhulst Libby Morgan University of Pennsylvania Follow this and additional works at: https://repository.upenn.edu/cgcs_publications Part of the Communication Commons Recommended Citation Price, Monroe; Verhulst, Stefaan; and Morgan, Libby. (2008). The Speculative Influence of Academic Research on the Making of Communications Policy: Reflections, Recollections and Informal Perspectives. Other Publications from the Center for Global Communication Studies. Retrieved from https://repository.upenn.edu/cgcs_publications/11 This paper is posted at ScholarlyCommons. https://repository.upenn.edu/cgcs_publications/11 For more information, please contact [email protected]. The Speculative Influence of Academic Research on the Making of Communications Policy: Reflections, Recollections and Informal erspectivP es Abstract This informal collection is designed to further a dialogue about the relationship between communications research and policy making. In particular it focuses on the impact of academic research on communications policy, and whether, and how, policy draws upon research (if at all). As quasi-editors (and commissioners of these essays) we have been highlighting various assumptions in the process. These assumptions mark every stage of the question (of the relevance of what academics do to what policy makers do). They mark an idealized mode of thinking about policy-making—an idealized mode sometimes articulated in legislation or judicial decision (or agency practice). The assumptions include the following: • Good and democratic policy making should be based upon an informed deliberation, and include relevant research findings. • Policy making involves problem solving, guided change and conflict esolution.r • Communications research should be (designed to be) an important input into policy making. • Policy makers have an appetite for (or can be compelled to have an appetite) research • There is room for “disinterested research” and possibly academic research has that quality • Academic research has a kind of methodological purity or excellence or at least strives for that • There is a disconnect between the demand and supply of policy relevant communications research. • In part, this is a problem of access to research and data (although with the Internet, this has become more a “translation” and “communications” problem, i.e. researchers fail to communicate timely and for a broader audience). • In part, the disconnect is a result of the difference between academic research and policymaking with regard to: 1. Incentives (e.g. tenure/peer review vs political viability) 2. Timetables (e.g. journal deadlines vs immediately) 3. Format preferences (lengthy vs succinct) 4. Agenda and relevance (old vs new challenges and technologies) 5. Quality and validity standards (neutral vs political) 6. Information about demand and supply • In part, the problem is related with the ignorance and capacity of policy makers vis-à-vis using research. What this effort hopes to do is to deepen and challenge these assumptions, as they relate to communications research and policy. Disciplines Communication Creative Commons License This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-No Derivative Works 4.0 International License. This report is available at ScholarlyCommons: https://repository.upenn.edu/cgcs_publications/11 The Speculative Influence of Academic Research on the Making of Communications Policy: Reflections, Recollections and Informal Perspectives Assembled by Monroe E. Price, Stefaan Verhulst and Libby Morgan Center for Global Communication Studies Annenberg School for Communication University of Pennsylvania Table of Contents Introduction Monroe Price and Stefaan Verhulst ................................................................................................ 2 The Academic and the Policy Maker Peng Hwa Ang ................................................................................................................................ 4 Trying to Intervene: British Media Research and the Framing of Policy Debate Georgina Born ................................................................................................................................. 7 Policy Research in an Evidence-Averse Environment Sandra Braman .............................................................................................................................. 12 Research in Government Agency Decisions - Observations about the FCC Daniel Brenner .............................................................................................................................. 28 The Contribution of Research to Communications Policy James Deane.................................................................................................................................. 31 Academic Research and Its Limited Impact on Telecommunications Policy Making Rob Frieden ................................................................................................................................... 35 Harmonising European Media Policy: Supranational Regulatory Trends and National Responses Beata Klimkiewicz ........................................................................................................................ 41 Reflections on Academic Engagement in the Communications Policymaking Process Phil Napoli .................................................................................................................................... 53 Comparative Media Law Research and its Impact on Policy Stefaan Verhulst and Monroe E. Price .......................................................................................... 56 A Pilgrim’s Progress: The Development of PolicyArchive: An Online Bridge between the Research and Policy Communities Tracy Westen ................................................................................................................................ 69 The role of academic research in media policy-making: The case-study of Hong Kong YAN Mei Ning ............................................................................................................................. 78 Contributor Biographies ............................................................................................................ 85 1 Introduction Please do not circulate without permission Introduction By Monroe E. Price and Stefaan Verhulst This informal collection is designed to further a dialogue about the relationship between communications research and policy making. In particular it focuses on the impact of academic research on communications policy, and whether, and how, policy draws upon research (if at all). As quasi-editors (and commissioners of these essays) we have been highlighting various assumptions in the process. These assumptions mark every stage of the question (of the relevance of what academics do to what policy makers do). They mark an idealized mode of thinking about policy-making—an idealized mode sometimes articulated in legislation or judicial decision (or agency practice). The assumptions include the following: • Good and democratic policy making should be based upon an informed deliberation, and include relevant research findings. • Policy making involves problem solving, guided change and conflict resolution. • Communications research should be (designed to be) an important input into policy making. • Policy makers have an appetite for (or can be compelled to have an appetite) research • There is room for "disinterested research" and possibly academic research has that quality • Academic research has a kind of methodological purity or excellence or at least strives for that • There is a disconnect between the demand and supply of policy relevant communications research. • In part, this is a problem of access to research and data (although with the Internet, this has become more a "translation" and "communications" problem, i.e. researchers fail to communicate timely and for a broader audience). • In part, the disconnect is a result of the difference between academic research and policymaking with regard to: o Incentives (e.g. tenure/peer review vs political viability) o Timetables (e.g. journal deadlines vs immediately) o Format preferences (lengthy vs succinct) o Agenda and relevance (old vs new challenges and technologies) o Quality and validity standards (neutral vs political) o Information about demand and supply • In part, the problem is related with the ignorance and capacity of policy makers vis-à- vis using research. What this effort hopes to do is to deepen and challenge these assumptions, as they relate to communications research and policy. We were inspired, in part, to do this project by Professor Sandra Braman’s edited volume Communication Researchers and Policy-Makers (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2003), and by a February 24-25, 2008 “Necessary Knowledge” workshop on Collaborative Research & 2 Introduction Please do not circulate without permission Advocacy for Media & Communications, organized by the Social Science Research Council and held at Annenberg. The idea was to explore the edges of this question by
Load more

Recommended publications
  • First Monday Interviews Sandra Braman (With Ed Valauskas)
    Valauskas http://firstmonday.org/ojs/index.php/fm/rt/printerFriendly/1773... First Monday, Volume 12, Number 4 — 2 April 2007 Sandra Braman has been studying the effects of new information technologies on policy for several decades. Recent work includes Change of State: Information, Policy, and Power (2006, MIT Press) and the edited volumes Communication Researchers and Policy–making (2003, MIT Press), The Emergent Global Information Policy Regime (2004, Palgrave Macmillan) and Biotechnology and Communication: The Meta–technologies of Information (2004, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates). Braman has been working with the Ford Foundation, Rockefeller Foundation, and Open Society Institute to map the contemporary legal environment, identify emergent policy issues, and try to bring the research and policy communities more closely together. She has published about 70 scholarly journal articles, book chapters, and books; served as book review editor of the Journal of Communication; is former Chair of the Communication Law & Policy Division of the International Communication Association; and sits on the editorial boards of nine scholarly journals in four countries. Currently Professor of Communication at the University of Wisconsin–Milwaukee, Braman previously served as Reese Phifer Professor of Telecommunication at the University of Alabama, Research Assistant Professor at the University of Illinois — Urbana, Henry Rutgers Research Fellow at Rutgers University, and Silha Fellow of Media Law and Ethics at the University of Minnesota. She earned her PhD from the University of Minnesota in 1988. During 1997–98 Braman designed and launched the first postgraduate programme in telecommunications and information policy on the African continent, as Visiting Professor and Director at the University of South Africa, and in 1 of 9 7/28/15, 3:52 PM Valauskas http://firstmonday.org/ojs/index.php/fm/rt/printerFriendly/1773..
    [Show full text]
  • The Trespass Fallacy in Patent Law , 65 Fla
    Florida Law Review Volume 65 | Issue 6 Article 1 October 2013 The rT espass Fallacy in Patent Law Adam Mossoff Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarship.law.ufl.edu/flr Part of the Intellectual Property Commons, and the Property Law and Real Estate Commons Recommended Citation Adam Mossoff, The Trespass Fallacy in Patent Law , 65 Fla. L. Rev. 1687 (2013). Available at: http://scholarship.law.ufl.edu/flr/vol65/iss6/1 This Essay is brought to you for free and open access by UF Law Scholarship Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Florida Law Review by an authorized administrator of UF Law Scholarship Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Mossoff: The Trespass Fallacy in Patent Law Florida Law Review Founded 1948 VOLUME 65 DECEMBER 2013 NUMBER 6 ESSAYS THE TRESPASS FALLACY IN PATENT LAW Adam Mossoff∗ Abstract The patent system is broken and in dire need of reform; so says the popular press, scholars, lawyers, judges, congresspersons, and even the President. One common complaint is that patents are now failing as property rights because their boundaries are not as clear as the fences that demarcate real estate—patent infringement is neither as determinate nor as efficient as trespass is for land. This Essay explains that this is a fallacious argument, suffering both empirical and logical failings. Empirically, there are no formal studies of trespass litigation rates; thus, complaints about the patent system’s indeterminacy are based solely on an idealized theory of how trespass should function, which economists identify as the “nirvana fallacy.” Furthermore, anecdotal evidence and other studies suggest that boundary disputes between landowners are neither as clear nor as determinate as patent scholars assume them to be.
    [Show full text]
  • Monroe E. Price Curriculum Vitae Annenberg School for Communication, University of Pennsylvania 3620 Walnut Street, Room 302 +1 (215) 573-8207 [email protected]
    Monroe E. Price Curriculum Vitae Annenberg School for Communication, University of Pennsylvania 3620 Walnut Street, Room 302 +1 (215) 573-8207 [email protected] Born: Vienna, Austria, 18/8/1938. Citizen United States and Austria. Married, three children. Education and Clerkships • Yale University, B.A., 1960 • Yale Law School (cum laude), J.D., 1964 • Law Clerk for Associate Justice Potter Stewart, United States Supreme Court, 1964–1965 • Assistant to W. Willard Wirtz, Secretary of Labor, 1965–1966 Research Positions and Appointments • Annenberg School for Communication, University of Pennsylvania (current). Director, Center for Global Communication Studies; Adjunct Full Professor. • Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law, Yeshiva University (current). Joseph and Sadie Danciger Professor; Director, Howard M. Squadron Program in Law, Media and Society. • Stanhope Centre for Communications Policy Research, LSE, London (current). Director. • Center for Communications and Media Studies, Central European University, Budapest (current). Chair. • Programme in Comparative Media Law and Policy, Oxford University. Co-Director 1997-2001. Senior Research Associate (current). • Centre for Socio-Legal Studies, Wolfson College, Oxford University. Research Associate and member of Advisory Council. • Institute for Advance Study, Princeton, New Jersey, 2000–2001. Member. • Yale Law School, Spring 2000. Lecturer, (seminar in Media Globalization). • Cornell Law School, Spring 1999. Visiting Professor. • John and Mary Markle Foundation, 1996–1998. Communications Fellow. • Media Studies Center (Freedom Forum), Spring 1998. Fellow. • University of Sydney, Spring 1996. Allen and Allen Chair. • Board of the Moscow Center for Media Law and Policy Studies, Russia. Co-Chair. • Cardozo School of Law, Yeshiva University, 1982–1991. Dean. 1 • Russian–American Commission on Radio and Television Policy.
    [Show full text]
  • Case No. 21184/01/16 State Attorney of Israel V. Breaking the Silence
    Case No. 21184/01/16 State Attorney of Israel v. Breaking the Silence Brief of Amici Curiae Prof. Eva Brems Anthony Lester, QC Gilbert Marcus, SC Prof. Monroe Price Prof. Andrey Rikhter Prof. Herman Schwartz Prof. Yuval Shany Prof. Dirk Voorhoof Prepared with the assistance of the Open Society Justice Initiative 1. As experts in the field of international law on freedom of expression and comparative media law, we provide this submission to assist the Petah Tikva Magistrates’ Court in its deliberations on the State Attorney’s request for a warrant for the production of documentation held by Breaking the Silence (BtS). The submission provides an overview of international law and standards relevant to the issue, as well as legal precedents established at the domestic level in other democracies. 2. This brief was drafted by the Open Society Justice Initiative. We have requested Michael Sfard, attorney for BtS, to file the brief with the Court. 3. This submission addresses two issues: A. The right to protect sources extends to non-governmental organizations such as BtS. It is well-established in international law that media workers and outlets enjoy a right to protect their sources of information, subject only to narrow exceptions. This right derives from the right to freedom of expression. The practice of international courts and mechanisms, although limited, indicates that the right to protect sources is not limited to traditional journalists and media, and can also be invoked by other social communicators, notably non-governmental organizations (NGOs) that gather and publish information of public interest. A number of precedents established at the domestic level in other democracies lend further support to this view.
    [Show full text]
  • April 16-18, 2013
    MILTON WOLF SEMINAR VIENNA, AUSTRIA APRIL 16-18, 2013 DIPLOMATIC MANEUVERS AND JOURNALISTIC COVERAGE IN A TIME OF RESET, PIVOT AND REBALANCE INFORMATION PACKET AS OF APRIL 10, 2013 Table of Contents Seminar Overview ................................................................................................................. 1 Thematic Overview ............................................................................................................... 1 Suggested Further Reading .................................................................................................... 2 Thank you ............................................................................................................................. 3 Contact Details ...................................................................................................................... 4 Agenda .................................................................................................................................. 5 Seminar Logistics ................................................................................................................... 9 Travel Logistics .................................................................................................................... 10 About the Milton Wolf Seminar Series ................................................................................. 12 About the Organizers ........................................................................................................... 13 About the Emerging Scholars
    [Show full text]
  • Agenda Item No. TEXAS A&M UNIVERSITY Office of the President
    Agenda Item No. TEXAS A&M UNIVERSITY Office of the President June 11, 2015 Members, Board of Regents The Texas A&M University System Subject: Approval of Academic Tenure, September 2015, Texas A&M University I recommend adoption of the following minute order. “The Board of Regents of The Texas A&M University System, in accordance with System Policy 12.01, Academic Freedom, Responsibility and Tenure, hereby authorizes the granting of tenure to the following faculty members at Texas A&M University as set forth in Exhibit , Tenure List No. 16-01.” Respectfully submitted, Michael K. Young President Approval Recommended: Approved for Legal Sufficiency: _________________________ _________________________ John Sharp Ray Bonilla Chancellor General Counsel Billy Hamilton Executive Vice Chancellor and Chief Financial Officer _________________________ James R. Hallmark, Ph.D. Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs ITEM EXHIBIT TEXAS A&M UNIVERSITY RECOMMENDATIONS FOR TENURE TENURE LIST NO. 16-01 Present Rank Yrs. Towards Tenure Effective Name Department Univ./ Other Inst. Date/Tenure COLLEGE OF AGRICULTURE AND LIFE SCIENCES * Dr. Peregrine Stephen Professor 0 18 Upon Approval Barboza Wildlife and Fisheries by the Board and Sciences Faculty Arrival * Dr. Michael J. Professor 0 6 Upon Approval Thomson Soil and Crop Sciences by the Board and Faculty Arrival BUSH SCHOOL OF GOVERNMENT AND PUBLIC SERVICE * Dr. Raymond Professor 0 18 Upon Approval Robertson International Affairs by the Board and Faculty Arrival COLLEGE OF EDUCATION AND HUMAN DEVELOPMENT * Dr. Yorghos Associate Professor 0 22 Upon Approval Apostolopoulos Health and Kinesiology by the Board and Faculty Arrival DWIGHT LOOK COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING * Dr. Nobuo Morita Professor 0 20 Upon Approval Petroleum Engineering by the Board and Faculty Arrival * Dr.
    [Show full text]
  • The Berkman Klein Center for Internet & Society
    Annual Report Academic Year 2016–2017 Contents I. Part One: Report of Activities .............................................................................................. 3 A. Summary of Academic Year: 2016–2017 ........................................................................ 3 1. Executive Summary ..................................................................................................... 3 2. Research, Scholarship and Project Activities ............................................................... 5 3. Contributions to HLS Teaching Program .....................................................................63 4. Participation of HLS Students in Program Activities ....................................................65 5. Faculty Participation ....................................................................................................65 6. Other Contributions to the HLS Community ................................................................66 7. Law Reform and Advocacy .........................................................................................66 8. Connections to the Profession ....................................................................................67 Research ...........................................................................................................................67 The Future of Digital Privacy ..............................................................................................67 Executive Education: Digital Security for Directors and Senior Executives
    [Show full text]
  • Download Magazine
    TRANSFORM EMPOWER ADVANCE EMPOWER AD- VANCE TRANSFORM ADVANCE FALL EMPOWER TRANS- 2018 FORM EMPOWER VOL. TRANSFORM ADVANCE 41 ADVANCE TRANSFORM EMPOWER AD EM- POWER ADVANCE TRANSFORM MANCE TRANSFORM EMPOWERSTANDING TALL A ADVANCE TR EMEM- POWER ADVANCE ANSFORM| EMPOWER ADVANCE THE EMMETT INSTITUTE 10 AT ER ADVANCE EMPOWER EER TRANSFORM AD- VANCE TRANSFORM EMPOWER ADVANCE TRANS- FORM ADVANCE EMPOWER TRANSFORM EMPOW- ER TRANSFORM ADVANCE EMPOWER ADVANCE TRANSFORM EMPOWER TRANSFORM EMPOWER EMPOWER TRANSFORM ADVANCE TRANSFORM EMPOWER ADVANCE TRANSFORM ADVANCE EM- POWER TRANSFORM EMPOWER TRANSFORM AD- UCLA LAW: BY THE NUMBERS 6,243 168 94% Median LSAT score of 1L J.D. applicants to UCLA Law for students in the Class of 2017 graduates employed 2018-19, a 14 percent increase 2021, a point higher than in in full-time, long-term, over 2017-18. 2017 and tied for second- bar-passage required or JD highest among California advantage jobs 10 months law schools. after graduation. 11 5 55 Rank among all law schools for New tenure and tenure- Countries where UCLA Law academic influence of faculty. track faculty joined the alumni live and work. school in 2018-19. 4,478 $25.1 Individual gifts to UCLA Law from alumni and friends of MILLION the school in 2017-18. in total gifts from alumni Thank you! and other donors in 2017-18. Thank you! Message from Dean Jennifer L. Mnookin who are the first in their families to graduate from college (see page 34). At least 14 percent of our 1Ls are first gen and at least 18 percent of our 2Ls are first gen, numbers significantly higher than those at nearly all of our peer schools.
    [Show full text]
  • The Constitution of a Nation, State by State
    books in print The Constitution of a Nation, State by State Although the United States has one Constitution, the laws of that docu- ment are viewed differently depending not only on the people interpreting it but the places from which they come. Would, for example, Abraham Lincoln have felt so strongly that secession was unconstitutional—that the Union preceded and superseded the States— if his geographical background were different? In his book of essays The Law of the Land, Sterling Professor of Law Akhil Reed Amar ’84 writes, “… consider how the world looked to Lincoln in 1861. His forebears came from several states—Kentucky, Virginia, Pennsylvania, and possibly New England as well…. He himself had lived in three states, having been born in Kentucky and having moved to Indiana at age seven and then on to Illinois as a young man. He and his family were first and foremost not Virginians, or Pennsylvanians, or New Englanders, or Kentuckian or Hoosiers or even Illinoisians. They were Americans.” The essays in The Law of the Land discuss the difference that states make on American jurisprudence. Each state has its own laws and culture, and these geographic and regional differences have impacted the nation throughout history. Amar’s writing gives a view of the historical roots of, and contemporary solutions to, many important constitu- tional questions. The three sections of the book focus on constitutional interpreters, constitutional cases, and constitutional provisions and principles. Each of the twelve essays in the book looks at a different state. In Florida, Amar breaks down the Bush v.
    [Show full text]
  • A Philosophical Introduction to CFPA Methods: an Overview of the Empirical Awards Paradigm & the Case for Objectivity
    A Philosophical Introduction to CFPA Methods: An Overview of the Empirical Awards Paradigm & the Case for Objectivity CONTENTS Summary (2-5) Epistemic & Normative Positions (6) Academic Review (7-14) Science vs. Balloting (15-18) Common Fallacies (19-25) Intuitive Bias Taxonomy (26-27) Glossary of Lay Terminology (28) 1 © 2008 College Football Performance Awards CFPA METHODOLOGY OVERVIEW 1. CFPA recipients are selected exclusively based upon objective scientific rankings. 2. Objective scientific rankings are based upon meta-algorithms derived from Differential Equations, Statistics, and Probability. 3. Meta-algorithms include 3x109 data collected from the past 10 seasons of FBS & FCS college football. 4. Meta-algorithms are internally valid, externally valid, significantly predictive, and non- exclusionary. POSITIVE IMPACT OF CFPA METHODOLOGY The CFPA methodology: 1. Eliminates politics and bias. 2. Promotes scientific literacy. 3. Encourages rational discourse. 4. Advances a sophisticated understanding of the game. 2 5. Fosters equity and fairness. OVERALL AWARDS The Overall Awards system annually recognizes the FBS & FCS performers responsible for the most overall team success. A performer x is an Overall Awards recipient if and only if x is responsible for the most overall success in Division I FBS college football given team success, strength of schedule, and the contributions of teammates. OFFENSIVE & DEFENSIVE AWARDS: The Offensive & Defensive Awards systems annually recognize FBS & FCS performers based upon the extent to which individual players increase the overall effectiveness of their teams. A performer x is an Offensive or Defensive Awards recipient if and only if x contributes the most to team success of any performer in Division I FBS college football, when controlling for strength of schedule.
    [Show full text]
  • The Nirvana Fallacy in Law Firm Regulation Debate
    Fordham Urban Law Journal Volume 33 Number 1 Article 1 2005 THE NIRVANA FALLACY IN LAW FIRM REGULATION DEBATE Elizabeth Chambliss Follow this and additional works at: https://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/ulj Part of the Legal Ethics and Professional Responsibility Commons Recommended Citation Elizabeth Chambliss, THE NIRVANA FALLACY IN LAW FIRM REGULATION DEBATE, 33 Fordham Urb. L.J. 119 (2005). Available at: https://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/ulj/vol33/iss1/1 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by FLASH: The Fordham Law Archive of Scholarship and History. It has been accepted for inclusion in Fordham Urban Law Journal by an authorized editor of FLASH: The Fordham Law Archive of Scholarship and History. For more information, please contact [email protected]. THE NIRVANA FALLACY IN LAW FIRM REGULATION DEBATE Cover Page Footnote Professor of Law, New York Law School. Thanks to Bruce Green and the Louis Stein Center for inviting me to participate in this conference, and to Margaret Raymond for indulging my excited (and belated) response to her paper. Thanks also to Tanina Rostain for helpful comments on earlier drafts. This article is available in Fordham Urban Law Journal: https://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/ulj/vol33/iss1/1 CHRISTENSEN_CHAMBLISS 2/3/2011 10:08 PM THE NIRVANA FALLACY IN LAW FIRM REGULATION DEBATES Elizabeth Chambliss∗ “[L]awyers can no longer look back a generation for their managerial models.”1 Most commentators would agree that large law firms have outgrown collegial management and self-regulation. With hundreds—and, in some firms, thousands—of lawyers,2 multiple national and international offices,3 an increasing number of mergers,4 and significant lateral mobility,5 partners no longer can rely on social ties and informal, face-to-face interaction for making decisions, conveying firm policy, or monitoring the quality of lawyers’ work.
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix 1 a Great Big List of Fallacies
    Why Brilliant People Believe Nonsense Appendix 1 A Great Big List of Fallacies To avoid falling for the "Intrinsic Value of Senseless Hard Work Fallacy" (see also "Reinventing the Wheel"), I began with Wikipedia's helpful divisions, list, and descriptions as a base (since Wikipedia articles aren't subject to copyright restrictions), but felt free to add new fallacies, and tweak a bit here and there if I felt further explanation was needed. If you don't understand a fallacy from the brief description below, consider Googling the name of the fallacy, or finding an article dedicated to the fallacy in Wikipedia. Consider the list representative rather than exhaustive. Informal fallacies These arguments are fallacious for reasons other than their structure or form (formal = the "form" of the argument). Thus, informal fallacies typically require an examination of the argument's content. • Argument from (personal) incredulity (aka - divine fallacy, appeal to common sense) – I cannot imagine how this could be true, therefore it must be false. • Argument from repetition (argumentum ad nauseam) – signifies that it has been discussed so extensively that nobody cares to discuss it anymore. • Argument from silence (argumentum e silentio) – the conclusion is based on the absence of evidence, rather than the existence of evidence. • Argument to moderation (false compromise, middle ground, fallacy of the mean, argumentum ad temperantiam) – assuming that the compromise between two positions is always correct. • Argumentum verbosium – See proof by verbosity, below. • (Shifting the) burden of proof (see – onus probandi) – I need not prove my claim, you must prove it is false. • Circular reasoning (circulus in demonstrando) – when the reasoner begins with (or assumes) what he or she is trying to end up with; sometimes called assuming the conclusion.
    [Show full text]