It is not enough for the crowd to be aware of their enslavement. They must also be aware of the path to emancipation.

The Committee of 10, who decided in 1893 which subjects would be taught in public school, decided that philosophy should be left out. Ten men decided that the vast majority of Americans do not need any formal education regarding the classics or any other form of philosophy. There is a reason that private schools require classes on Western Philosophy and most public schools never mention it. The elite know of its value, they just choose to deprive it from the rest of us.

It is of the utmost importance that we as individuals use a reproducible and empirical structure of critical thinking. There is a culture of ignorance in most nations that assumes that one's ignorance is equal to another's knowledge. What Good Intel intends to do is educate, forms of solid argument techniques so that more people can check if their beliefs have merit in fact and reality.

Using the scientific method and certain aspects of Ancient Greek philosophy, we can undo some of the damage being done by our failing education system. We have been conditioned to absorb, regurgitate, and disregard sections of information in order to pass standardized tests required by the curriculum. This leaves very little room for a real understanding and questioning of the information and leads to a lack of critical thinking. We aim to correct this issue with simple techniques below.

By practicing and understanding these strategies, you can feel more confident in your beliefs, decisions, and personal well-being. If you feel that an important philosophy was left out and should be added, let us know by clicking here.


10-commandments-of-rational-debate-600w.jpg

What is a fallacy?

A fallacy is an error in reasoning. A fallacious argument is one that may appear correct, but on examination proves not to be so. Even if the premises and conclusion are all correct, an argument may still be fallacious if the reasoning used to reach that conclusion is not logically valid.

Fallacy of false cause

To make the assumption that an event occurred after another event, and therefore the first event caused the other. (Post hoc ergo propter hoc) Just because an event followed another doesn't necessarily prove the first caused the other.

For example, "Since hair always precedes the growth of teeth in babies, the growth of hair causes the growth of teeth."

Fallacy of composition

Assuming that what is true for a member of a group is also true for the group.

For example, in a crowded auditorium if one patron stands up they can see more clearly above the heads of those that are seated. However if the group as a whole were to stand up, then the benefit would be eliminated for all.

Fallacy of division

Assuming that what is true for the group is also true for each part of the group.

For example, if the average annual income of Americans is $40,000 and Tom is an american, he must make $40,000. This is not enough information to prove this assertion, therefore making it a logical fallacy. 

fallacy of generalization

This fallacy occurs when we apply a generalization to an individual case that it does not necessarily govern. The mistake often lies in failing to recognize that there may be exceptions to a general rule.

For example, sixty men can do a job sixty times as fast as one man. One man can dig a post hole in one minute, therefore 60 men can dig a post hole in 1 second. The problem here is with the failure to recognize that not all jobs can be done more quickly by sixty men. Although the general principle may be true, there are exceptions to the rule.

Circular argument

This occurs when when the conclusion lies buried in the premises used to reach that conclusion.

For example, the Supreme Court’s power of judicial review is inherently undemocratic. When unelected judges reign supreme, it cannot be said that we have a government "of the people, by the people, and for the people." The speaker is assuming the truth of what they are trying to prove in the very effort to prove it. If you look at these two sentences closely, you will see that they are essentially paraphrases of one another. Because the second sentence is longer and more complex, it tends to trick us into thinking that it is a logically distinct idea – but it is not.

argument of ignorance

An argument is fallacious when it maintains that a proposition is true because it has not been proved false or false because it has not been proved true.

For example, the Big Bang theory is a complete and utter lie. This ‘theory’ has been bandied about for decades and no one has ever been able to point to any conclusive proof. The absence of conclusive proof does not establish that a theory or proposition is false. It merely establishes that the theory or proposition is still open to some debate.