“The opinions that are held with passion are always those for which no good ground exists; indeed the passion is the measure of the holder’s lack of rational conviction. Opinions in politics and religion are almost always held passionately.” ―Bertrand Russell, Sceptical Essays
Dr. Dominic Tierney’s recent article, “Why Has America Stopped Winning Wars” argues that since WWII, America’s war record is one win (Desert Storm) and four losses (Korea, Vietnam, Afghanistan, and Iraq). United States’ leaders and key stakeholders often turn to academics like Dr. Dominic Tierney, PhD, Oxford, post-doctoral fellow, Ohio State University and Harvard. Dr. Tierney seemingly provides an expert-based and useful argument on America’s use of military power. Unfortunately, Tierney’s argument, whether right or wrong must be discarded because it is based on flagrant fallacies in logic. The argument’s most egregious logic fallacy is appeal to emotions. By …show more content…
This reasoning trick provides Tierney free rein to interchange the terms as he sees fit throughout the remainder of his argument. The argument continues by quoting General Patton, ‘Americans play to win [emphasis added] all of the time, that’s why Americans have never lost nor will ever lose a war.’ Next the argument states, “Patton could look back on a century of U.S. victories [emphasis added] in major wars.” Tierney continues, “The price of military triumph [emphasis added] was often immense.” Finally, to complete the equivocation loop, “…all of a sudden, the United States stopped winning [emphasis added]
Dr. Dominic Tierney’s recent article, “Why Has America Stopped Winning Wars” argues that since WWII, America’s war record is one win (Desert Storm) and four losses (Korea, Vietnam, Afghanistan, and Iraq). United States’ leaders and key stakeholders often turn to academics like Dr. Dominic Tierney, PhD, Oxford, post-doctoral fellow, Ohio State University and Harvard. Dr. Tierney seemingly provides an expert-based and useful argument on America’s use of military power. Unfortunately, Tierney’s argument, whether right or wrong must be discarded because it is based on flagrant fallacies in logic. The argument’s most egregious logic fallacy is appeal to emotions. By …show more content…
This reasoning trick provides Tierney free rein to interchange the terms as he sees fit throughout the remainder of his argument. The argument continues by quoting General Patton, ‘Americans play to win [emphasis added] all of the time, that’s why Americans have never lost nor will ever lose a war.’ Next the argument states, “Patton could look back on a century of U.S. victories [emphasis added] in major wars.” Tierney continues, “The price of military triumph [emphasis added] was often immense.” Finally, to complete the equivocation loop, “…all of a sudden, the United States stopped winning [emphasis added]