Analysis of rebuttal; Fallacies; Better to be a leopard than a fox.

Analysis of rebuttal; Fallacies; Better to be a leopard than a fox.  

By Dr. Sohail Ansari

Conceived and worded by DR Sohail Ansari (originality of concepts and originality of words).

He believes that there can never be a zero scope for improvement and appreciates criticism if it is not for the sake of criticism.

Three different statements:

·      Every journalist is not a columnist and every columnist is not a journalist.

·      Every columnist is a journalist, but every journalist is not a columnist.

·      Every journalist is a columnist; but every columnist is not a journalist.  

Analysis of rebuttal

·        GRE and GMAT have the section ‘analysis of an argument’. Candidates are to examine the passage for its logical inconsistencies or flaws. I feel that it would be much better if GRE and GMAT have the section ‘analysis of rebuttal’; rebuttal should be done by the book and candidate is asked to have it analysis. It is more demanding and more interesting I guess so; candidates require much more intellectual strength to pick errors in understanding contextual meanings or sense of a word. I felt in that way because I happened to go through some interestingly funny analysis; for example; the analysis of ‘if your memory is too good to forget, you cannot forgive’ went: ‘I agree that weak memory is essential for forgiveness; however it can create the serious problems for a student; his grades must suffer’.

Analysis of rebuttal requires one to pick errors in interpreting the function of something; for example: I recently read a quote from Nietzsche: ‘Many a man fails as an original thinker simply because his memory is too good’. I shared it with one of my very good acquaintance who analyzed it in this way: ‘Memory allows original thinking without it every repeated act will appear original’. A person does not forget the fact if ready-made responses hammered into him by a dint of a brute repetition; it may not interpret things as he sees them but as he is taught to see them. Original idea is an idea that has not been conceived before or an aspect of an idea that is not seen before. If a person is repeatedly told that the answers he is taught are the only answers and he must remember them as the only responses so he won’t think of any other response and he must fail, then, as an original thinker simply because his memory is too good. Good memory allows one to know that he is repeating but if a person simply forgets things so every repeated act appears original; he does everything first time and meet every person first time. Memory does not allow the original thinking; it simply helps one to know he is doing thing again not the first time.       

Fallacies 

·      Theory is wrong in claiming that people not good in following dictation commit errors in spelling of words because some people those are good at following dictation commit errors in spelling of words.

·       Theory is wrong in claiming that good people do good things because some good things are done by bad people.

Better to be a leopard than a fox

·        A car creeps and a long line of cars follow it. Every car behind has the speed to overtake it; but no driver has the backbone to do it as a mighty Jinn is on the driving seat of the leading car and doing so will attract his wrath. ‘Cross me if you can is like answer me if you can’: ‘who is responsible for the missing person?’ Alternative to the right answer is the wrong answer or no answer. Everyone knows the answer but has no one has the backbone to give it as giving the right answer can attract the wrath of…

Right answer sometime is the pleasant answer not the true answer; one interesting parable of lion, leopard, wolf and a fox may help us to understand it. These four animals coordinated in hunting and when efforts were crowned, a lion ordered a leopard to divide prey with justice among participants. Leopard divided the hunted animal in four equal parts but a lion grew furious and killed leopard, and then asked a wolf to divide it with justice; wolf divided in three equal parts, again a lion became furious and killed wolf; then a lion asked a fox to divided it with justice; a fox divided the hunted animal in four parts, gave three parts to a lion and kept one part to itself. King lion grew happy and asked to a fox ‘who has taught you to be so wise and just?’ A fox replied: ‘my lord; leopard and wolf taught me how to do justice’. For the fool parable is a story as he reads it for the sake of enjoyment not for applying its moral to his life; however, applying a moral of a certain parables has its cost: one has to give up his integrity and principles. One must pay whatever cost truth has, and better be leopard and wolf than a fox.

Fallacy: Ad Hominem must be read as it is so relevant to today. One must always know that attacking against the character of a person reporting or leveling charges does not make charges wrong as character or action does not have always bearing on the truth or falsity of the claims being made. Having rejected the charges on the basis of irrelevant facts, the charges are taken to be evidence against the charges the person in question is making: ‘you must say these as you are lackey to forces against our beloved country’.