Critical Thinking 101

Barrie Tilghman’s press conference Friday reminded me of my school days. Based on her remarks she would have failed any critical thinking course which I have ever taken or taught.

During her brief remarks Friday, the mayor used no fewer than 9 fallacies in trying to make her case that the mean, nasty blogs were bad. Here are just a few examples:

Her inference that Joe Albero’s claims were false. This is an ad hominem fallacy. Did Joe say mean things? Yes. Does that make him a “bad” person? Maybe. Does that mean that all of the evidence he has provided regarding the waster water treatment plant is false? No.

Her “appeal to the ‘legitimate media’” to inform the citizens of the “truth”. This fallacy is called appeal to flattery. She doesn’t offer any evidence that what she is saying is the truth. She just hopes that flattering the media present at the press conference will be enough.

Barrie’s statement that she won’t “comment on the lack of facts” put forward on the local web logs. This is a classic case of begging the question. Her premise is her conclusion. I assume this is why she has (to date) refused to provide one instance where “Delmarva Dealings” or another blog has made a material misstatement of fact.

Barrie Tilghman stated that blogs bring public discourse down to the “lowest common denominator” and that they inspire “what we hate, what we fear”. This is an appeal to consequences of belief. If you believe the blogs, the (very subtle) inference is that you are a bigot, a racist, a homophobe, etc. Since this is an obviously bad consequence, the blogs must be lying.

Barrie Tilghman’s whole victimology shtick was an appeal to pity. I’m the victim. I must be telling the truth.

Since Joe Albero comments on our blogs, we must all be lying. This is called the guilt by association fallacy.

There are also instances of the relativist fallacy, the spotlight fallacy and the straw man fallacy (actually, just about the whole point of Barrie’s little soiree was a straw man). Her press conference was the kind of speech you use for a final exam in an undergrad critical thinking class.

The primary question is, did Barrie Tilghman offer any evidence that the blogs are lying about her or city government and are they contributing to an uncivil discourse in Salisbury. The answer to the former appears to be no and to the latter … maybe. When asked to provide any evidence to her claims the mayor has refused (an email from one person who comments on a blog is not evidence against the blogs themselves). As someone who not only writes for a blog, but reads them daily I must admit that we have all been guilty at one time or another of uncivil discourse. Unfortunately for Barrie Tilghman this forces us to examine the tone and tenor of public discourse in city government. As witnessed at the last regular city council meeting, the level of debate there makes the blogs read like “The New England Primer”. When the mayor or a member of council infers that a constituent is a liar, is this a civil public discourse? When the city council president refuses to allow a member of council to make a comment is this an environment conducive to the civil and rational exchange of ideas? When the council president refuses to follow the council’s own rules of procedure in order to halt discussion is this a civil exchange?

The only positive statement that I can make regarding the mayor’s little tirade is her call for people to read our local blogs. While I believe that she was hoping that the mainstream media would slam us, they haven’t. Instead, they have picked up the mayor’s banner and called for you to read and evaluate our writing yourselves. This is as it should be. If you agree with us, that’s great. If you don’t, that’s fine too. We welcome your input and participation in the process.

While we have stated in a previous post that we disavow Mr. Albero’s email to Mayor Tilghman and wish that he had used better language, we do not wish to infer that any statement made by Mr. Albero was false. None of us here are in a position to make that judgment. We were using his name and statements only because they were the backbone of Mayor Tilghman’s argument that the blogs are lying to the public. If Mr. Albero feels misused by this, we apologize.