I have Two Questions for You
Sitting across the top of my desk are the first several books assigned to us for our program.
True Confessions: Since November, each time I read the title, “How to Read Numbers,” my heart raced with excitement thinking it was a guide in reading the Old Testament book of Numbers! To be fair, the English title “Numbers” (Greek Arithmoi) is based on the presence of census returns in the first four chapters, so I was close! It was only 10 days ago that I read the subtitle: A Guide to Stats in the News (And knowing when to trust them), that my excitement turned to dread, as many in our cohort have already lamented. From grade school until middle school, I loved math and even excelled on taking math tests. For some reason, once I entered high school, I literally could not do the math problems on my own after I took Geometry. In graduate school, I was required to take statistics so I hired a tutor who did a wonderful job of explaining it to me; my brain froze when alone with the numbers. The unfortunate part of not succeeding in math for me was avoiding it at all costs. In 2010, I experienced a turning point in my math journey. The middle school where all three of my daughters were attending offered me a teaching job, giving me a rare opportunity. For three years, the four of us drove to school and back home together every day. The only caveat? I had to teach a math class.
Something of a miracle transformed my confidence when I taught my students math. Each lesson taught me how to explain the concepts of fractions, algebraic expressions, geometry, spatial sense, measurement, data analysis, and probability. Now I realize we weren’t doing high level math, but reading and teaching, explaining and working out one math concept at a time provided me with a few moments of math success and understanding. For those of you who experienced “maths” (as Chivers and Chivers call it), as difficult, disengaging, or intimidating, I felt a sense of camaraderie with you as I opened the book and started reading. To my surprise, the authors did for us what teaching math to middle schoolers did for me: By the end of each chapter of How to Read Numbers, I understood the problem and hopefully will know how to spot it in the future.
Yet, I still have Questions as a Researcher and Writer When it Comes to Numbers:
- Should I Avoid Persuasion? The authors say directly up front, “Our news increasingly comes in number form: police-reported crimes go up and down; a nation’s economy shrinks and grows; the latest figures on deaths and cases from COVID-19 are released. In order to understand the world around us, we may not need to be good at maths, but we do need to understand how numbers are made, how they are used and how they can go wrong, because otherwise we’ll make bad decisions, as individuals and as a society.”[1] No matter how good or not I am at understanding math, my goal as I communicate, research and study for a doctorate in global leadership is for me to embody and know the data so I can write and explain it. Is the challenge for me in using the supportive materials, data, and examples I find to create understanding by sharing objective, factual information to inform, not persuade? I cannot tell you how difficult this is for me. My natural proclivity is to persuade, to sell, to promote –something or someone, otherwise, I don’t find it all that interesting. When reading the chapter on Statistical Significance, I laughed when I read if we measure enough things, and combine them in enough ways, or make small enough, reasonable-seeming adjustments to the data, then we could guarantee that we’d find something just by coincidence (p.40).[2] It reminds me of when my husband tries persuading me how the dairy in ice cream is actually nutritionally good for us as he starts quoting some random study that landed in his newsfeed!
- Can We Truly Avoid Fallacies in Our Reasoning?. If I take anything from reading Chivers and Chivers along with Kathryn Schulz’s book[3], it is the challenge to be ultra aware of false logic or reasoning in my arguments. As a public speaker and professor of communication, I have become overzealous in my awareness when speakers use their false reasoning skills when they are ill-prepared or uninformed. Imagine all the turmoil that could have been avoided in our personal, political and professional aspects of our lives? Or imagine all the angst that would have been avoided had prosperity-Gospel or Patriarchal preachers had someone fact-checking every one of their sermons before delivering them? (I’m so thankful for Kate Bowler’s work in this area and I highly recommend her good research in her book, Blessed).[4]
Just for my own review and our collective reminder, remember this list of the top ten fallacies or flaws in our logic?
- Hasty Generalization: Inductive reasoning when too few examples are cited.
- False Analogy: Inductive reasoning when situations compared are not similar.
- False Cause: Causal reasoning when insufficient evidence/one thing caused another.
- False Authority: When a person making the argument doesn’t have the knowledge but is perceived credible because they are respected.
- Bandwagon: Arguing for a course of action because it is commonly done.
- False Dilemma: When a speaker only offers two options.
- Ad hominem: Attacking a person rather than an argument.
- Slippery Slope: Arguing that one action will lead to a series of others.
- Red herring: An argument that distracts from the argument at hand.
- Appeal to Tradition: “It’s the way things have been done before[5].”
Out of curiosity, which one of the above fallacies activates your inner critic the most? Or which fallacy do you tend to fall back on when crafting your argument?
For me, it’s False Cause or Causality from the book: I always want to know whether one thing causes another!
[1] Chivers, Tom, and David Chivers. How to Read Numbers: A Guide to Statistics in the News. Weidenfeld & Nicolson, 2021.
[2] Chivers, Tom, and David Chivers. How to Read Numbers: A Guide to Statistics in the News. Weidenfeld & Nicolson, 2021.
[3] Schulz, Kathryn. Being Wrong: Adventures in the Margin of Error. Illustrated edition. HarperCollins e-books, 2010.
[4] Kate Bowler. “Blessed: A History of the American Prosperity Gospel.” Accessed February 9, 2023. https://katebowler.com/books/blessed-a-history-of-the-american-prosperity-gospel/.
[5] Communication in the Real World v2.0 | Textbook | FlatWorld, 2017.
About the Author
Pam Lau
Pamela Havey Lau brings more than 25 years of experience in speaking, teaching, writing and mediating. She has led a variety of groups, both small and large, in seminars, trainings, conferences and teachings. Pam’s passion is to see each person communicate with their most authentic voice with a transparent faith in Jesus Christ. With more than 10, 000 hours of writing, researching, and teaching the heart and soul of Pam’s calling comes from decades of walking alongside those who have experienced healing through pain and peace through conflict. As a professor and author, Pam deeply understands the role of mentoring and building bridges from one generation to another. She has developed a wisdom in how to connect leaders with their teams. Her skill in facilitating conversations extends across differences in families, businesses, schools, universities, and nonprofits. Pam specializes in simplifying complex issues and as a business owner, has helped numerous CEOs and leaders communicate effectively. She is the author of Soul Strength (Random House) and A Friend in Me (David C. Cook) and is a frequent contributor to online and print publications. You can hear Pam’s podcast on Real Life with Pamela Lau on itunes. Currently, Pam is a mediator for families, churches, and nonprofits. You can contact Pam through her website: PamelaLau.com. Brad and Pam live in Newberg, Oregon; they have three adult daughters and one son-in-law. One small, vocal dog, Cali lives in the family home where she tries to be the boss! As a family they enjoy worshiping God, tennis, good food and spending time with family and friends.13 responses to “I have Two Questions for You”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Hi Pam,
I like your questions! I will be brave and go first.
Which one of the above fallacies activates your inner critic the most? Ad Hominem: Attacking a person rather than an argument. I don’t have a problem with others believing or thinking differently from me. I do have a problem with personal attacks because of those differing beliefs. I start wondering if the strongly held belief or thought isn’t more about being right when personal attacks are made. I don’t find that type of argument very engaging or worth my time.
Which fallacy do you tend to fall back on when crafting your argument? I don’t like to argue so that’s a tough one even in my writing. I think I land somewhere between a Hasty Generalization or Appeal to Tradition. I hope I catch myself!
Thank you for helping me discern some of my own fallacies as I move forward with my research and writing!
Jenny,
Thanks for your bravery in going first in answering my curiosity. To your point, attacking a person is a low-class approach to argument and yet since the beginning of social media, this kind of fallacious thinking has gone viral–literally!
In my last post, I mentioned the Royce Report, a Christian woman’s news report about all things going wrong in the Christian world. Although I agree that we need to know the facts about leaders when they fail morally, ethically or spiritually–I cringe every time I read her post. It makes me wonder since the Spirit of God lives in us and we are all made in the image of God if/when we do attack a person publicly for any reason, we are attacking a portion of our Almighty God? What do you think? Why else are we so uncomfortable with it?
Hi Pam,
Of that list I can be tempted to produce a false dilemma as a way of arguing my point…..but I can also tend to be the opposite of ‘hasty generalizations’ and I never ‘land the plane’ as it relates to making a decision or holding a position. As an Enneagram 5 I always feel like there’s more information to gather or points that speak against my position so I can be reluctant to take a position.
I can tell you my ‘trigger’ is False Authority! Why do celebrities think they are experts in complex social problems (as one example)? More close to home, why do popular Pastors start thinking they are somehow qualified to be be marriage counsellors (or counsellors in general), sex therapists, financial advisors, etc… So many Pastors need to know their lane and learn to stay in it!
Scott~ I believe you are walking a research path for your doctorate that aligns with your excellent insight here: “More close to home, why do popular Pastors start thinking they are somehow qualified to be be marriage counsellors (or counsellors in general), sex therapists, financial advisors, etc… So many Pastors need to know their lane and learn to stay in it!”
How might this inform you as you look into training pastors for their call to ministry in the Church?
Pam, what a good and challenging question you raise (although nowhere near as challenging as middle school math, I can say from my current life experience!). I am definitely guilty of making hasty generalizations, especially when I see an anecdote or a bit of evidence that helps my argument along. It’s a terrible tendency and yet I can’t seem to get away from it. I wonder what you (and anyone else who wants to chime in) do to consistently identify and correct these fallacies in our logic?
Kim, What a great question within this mini-conversation. Taking my communication reasoning skills as seriously as I do my faith, I always have others read my work or give me feedback before I offer something before others (Not on this blog which maybe I should!?) My husband is very bright and often far more logic than I am yet I tell him has what I call, “Selective intelligence.” (LOL). I say that because even wrong logic can be persuasive and sound good. We really do need people to give us honest and truthful feedback. It’s hard to find people who will do this voluntarily. Would like to hear from others, as well.
Hi Pam! I enjoyed reading your journey with Math. I chuckled when reading it..I had a similar collision with Statistics in Undergrad and in Graduate School. it caused me to believe that Math was not my friend. I have since made peace with it.
You posed great questions!
For sure, “False Authority” aggravates my inner critic. I really had to think about which fallacy that tend to lean towards. I believe that it is the slippery slope.
Jonita, I feel a renewed bond with you on our math journeys! Don’t you think the Slippery Slope fallacy is the most difficult to not slide down (No pun intended)? In all fairness, how one “thing” or “event” led to another is how I was taught the history of our nation. Thanks for sharing.
Pam,
You’ve done a great job of getting us to think about all the ways we can be fallible in our logic. I see several that resonate but will pick false authority. As ministers, we have the power to state fact when we have not done the research to warrant our statements. Ouch!
On the other hand, my inner critic cringes when ad hominum comes into play. I agree with Jenny in that I accept that we can all have varying beliefs, but to be attacked personally because of a belief is unacceptable and lacks intellectual maturity no matter how wrong you feel someone’s belief is.
Thanks for a well-written blog post!
Ooh! Esther! “Lacks intellectual maturity.” I like that term as it aptly applies to the current state of our leadership conversation, nation and global crisis with those who are in leadership. Wouldn’t it be interesting to take a closer look at leaders who attack people’s personal beliefs in their rhetoric both personally and publicly and then compare that with those who are more independent of that type of fallacy? Who is the more effective leader and communicator?
You have had so many life experiences. I did not know you also taught middle school! I found myself wanting to solve the problem of statistics in my everyday life, how can I overcome them and see the “real” truth in the data they are presenting.
But I think you present a much better way to approach statistics – be aware of the benefits and challenges. I like it. Simple and an effective way to view numbers and data without getting bogged down in what you’re seeing and trying to really know what’s going on.
Thanks for this perspective.
Mathieu, What makes writing the blog posts interesting is how we are each offering a unique perspective! Yes, I took a simple mirroring approach as I read each chapter by asking myself, “Do I understand what Chivers and Chivers just explained?” And by asking myself that question, I was reminded of the Ten Fallacies in argument and persuasion. I am curious which one you resonate with the most?
I love your writing, Pam!
We, as humans, cannot be separated from making mistakes. As long as the error is not intentional or done to cause chaos, then it remains a human characteristic. I agree that each of us needs someone to double-check our research or speeches before they are published or delivered. In any case, I also appreciate the ten-point warning you gave at the end of the post