Links to rhetorical tools:

Here are links to the rhetorical tools used in this class:

Schemes & Tropes -- Perelman & Olbrechts-Tyteca -- Fallacies -- Burke -- Rhetorical Toolbox -- Conspiracy Rhetorics

Monday, February 26, 2018

GHoST Fallacies


1.     “Over the past ten years I have had the privilege of working with one of the nation’s top paranormal investigative teams run by one of the few expert’s in the field (although she says there are no experts it’s an ever-changing subject).” http://www.ghostexas.org/meet.htm
Appeal to Misleading Authority
By saying that he is working with an expert in the field of ‘paranormal investigation’ is somewhat of an appeal to misleading authority as the field of paranormal investigation is a pseudoscience. Saying that you’re an expert in paranormal investigation is about the same as saying you are an expert in reading the movement of the stars. It takes no certification and no credentials whatsoever to claim you’re an expert in the field, although to her credit, she claims she’s not truly an expert in the field as it is ‘ever changing’.
2.     Many times, what people are going through is quite frightening and I hope to ease their emotions by helping them understand what is actually happening. Having three kids of my own and living in a haunted home with them has given me a special insight to what it’s like dealing with a family and the paranormal which helps me bring that added touch of understanding in these frightening situations.”
            http://www.ghostexas.org/meet.htm
Emotional Appeal
Saying that people who live in haunted houses are frightened and implying that they ‘need to be rescued’ is an emotional appeal. X is true because it works for the good of society, with ‘x’ being paranormal investigation. One of the things I find most baffling about this statement is the fact that she openly admits that she is living in a haunted house with her children. If you have children. Then why are you living in an alleged haunted house where they could very easily get emotionally harmed?! I get that it’s probably more complicated than that but come on!
3.     Matt and his wife did a wonderful job on helping us find out who and what was in our house. They got rid of our demon ghost and left our good ones. My husband and I were very pleased with their professional ways.  If I ever need assistance again I will call them back. I highly recommend Matt and Rachael.  Again, thank you.
http://www.ghostexas.org/Letter1.htm
Wishful Thinking
This one is just plain silly, and honestly I wouldn’t be surprised if this man was completely made up. ‘They got rid of our demon ghost and left our good ones’

What the fuck does that even mean?!

Thank goodness they took care of that nasty demon ghost that was making noises in the middle of the night and thank goodness they left the friendly ones! I don’t know what they would’ve done had they taken the friendly ghosts as well!
4.     After the investigation was competed, they decided a cleansing would be necessary in order to bring peace back to our home.  This is a Christian based ceremony which utilizes prayer and the anointing of all entrances & exits in the home. http://www.ghostexas.org/Letter3.htm
Scope Fallacy
The biggest problem that I have with this example is the use of the phrase ‘Christian-based’ without saying what branch or denominations of Christians use this alleged practice. Saying something is ‘Christian-based’ implies that all Christians use this practice without exception, which is not the case. It’s also highly likely it is referred to as Christian-based because it is an appeal to the credibility of Christianity.
5.     With the experiences of our investigator coupled with the equipment and events of the night. GHoST deemed the home to have paranormal activity and a in depth home cleansing was needed. After discussing with the $$$ they agreed, and a cleansing was performed.  
 http://www.ghostexas.org/case019.htm
Accident
Wait, I thought it said they don’t accept monetary donations, yet in this example says they collected payment? This shows that the one instance in which they didn’t charge is not represented to the whole.

No comments:

Post a Comment