Steelman
Appeal to consequences
Also called argumentum ad consequentiam, wishful thinking (a form of it), argument from consequences.
Arguing that a claim is true or false because believing it would have good or bad results.
What it is
Concluding that a factual claim is false because accepting it would lead to bad outcomes, or true because accepting it would be good, instead of looking at the evidence for the claim itself.
The pattern
If X were true, something bad (or good) would follow. Therefore X is false (or true).
An example
“The economy can’t be heading for a recession. If it were, I’d probably lose my job, and I can’t deal with that.”
The personal consequences are real, but they’re no evidence about the economy.
Why it fails
Reality doesn’t adjust to what we’d prefer. Whether a claim is true and whether believing it is pleasant are separate questions.
When it’s not a fallacy
Most lists skip this part. Calling a fair point a fallacy is a mistake too.
It can be fair when
- The question is about what to do, not what’s true. When choosing a policy or an action, consequences are exactly what you should weigh.
Try one
A question from the app. The wrong answers are its usual look-alikes.
Town meeting. Ruth: “The new study for our coast says sea level here will rise about 30 centimeters by 2050, not the meter people keep quoting.” Jamal: “If people hear 30 centimeters, they’ll shrug and we’ll lose another ten years. I don’t buy it. It’s going to be a lot worse than that.” Ruth: “The full report’s on the town website for anyone who wants it.”
What’s the flaw?
How people might react to a number has no bearing on whether the number is right. Jamal rejects the study because of what believing it might lead to, not because of anything in the study.
A fair reply
“People might shrug, but that’s a reason to explain the study well, not a reason to think it’s off.”
Often confused with
- Appeal to emotion
Appeal to emotion uses feelings as reasons in general. Appeal to consequences specifically judges truth by the desirability of the outcomes.
- Slippery slope
A slippery slope predicts a chain of bad outcomes from an action. Appeal to consequences rejects a factual claim because its implications are unwelcome.
Where the name comes from
The name says it: an appeal to what would happen if a claim were true, instead of to whether it is. The Latin, argumentum ad consequentiam, means “argument to the consequences”, and “argument from consequences” is the same idea. Wishful thinking is its hopeful form: believing something because you’d like it to be so.
Sources
- Fallacies, Bradley Dowden, Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy
In the app
Practice spotting it on arguments that sound real.
Steelman has more examples of appeal to consequences, how to answer it in a real conversation, and practice rounds that mix it with its look-alikes, so you learn the difference, not just the name. Coming soon to iPhone and Android.
You’re on the list.
We’ll email you the day Steelman is out.
Thanks for offering to test. We’ll write before the beta with how to join.