Redux. Fallacies.

There is a pleothra of information on the web about fallacies. Today, my aim is to find something about WHY people persist in employing such bad, faulty, or illogical thinking.

In plain English, I am looking for (further) clues to why people choose to have their heads up their asses (or otherwise if not additionally, seem to not care if that is how they are seen.)

And to be clear, dear reader, I am not talking about the beliefs of and concerning whatever issue is then under discussion, as what I am calling "Head In Ass-ism;" I am talking about the sloppy thinking and argument relied on, to express and support that end-product.

So far (I am composing as I google, sorry) I have one vote for "most people have non-logical reasons for believing the things they do,"
http://www.datanation.com/fallacies/howto.htm

and that might be as good as it gets, for discovered answers. I do guess that non-logical beliefs sort of deserve non-logical expression.

There is an appreciable symmetry to that theory.

Next we have the "It's deliberate" theory. That is the idea that those who use fallacies are knowingly trying to get away with a stinker (either as a lame offense, or a perhaps lamer defense.) And often is the case when I (and many if not most people, I guess) am damned sure I am dealing with someone who just can't admit they "Did not think it through," or otherwise (strangely) did not understand their "brilliant" argument would not withstand the force of a single beat of a butterfly's wings, before falling to pieces, and as a result of that (and EGO and DYSFUNCTION) can't just say, "Opps . . . this round is yours. Now excuse me as I need to disengage, reload, and bone up on tactics."

And just for the purpose of making it a nice not-even three theories, I will vamp here, and just say off the top of my head that some people are just so Married to their beliefs (be they rationally based or not) that they can't even Conceive that there is any alternative. Hence, they really don't think they have to do the work of actually, supporting, explaining, defending, prosecuting, validating, justifying, buttressing, shoring-up, constructing, and ultimately providing any reasoning for what they believe. So they don't, or do it so sloppy-assed that they commit the ultimate act of (anti) intellectual arrogance:

They merely express and essentially stand by their beliefs, even if there is no "visible" support or logical foundation for them. (Think about the image of Wile E. Coyote, standing in the air, too far past the edge of the cliff, and having that awareness that there is nothing underneath his paws, but for the canyon floor . . . . way way way way way way far down below.)

I don't mean to be harsh here; and I went to law school, where they stress things like identifying the strengths of your opponent's side, and the weaknesses of yours, AND ACT ACCORDINGLY.

Still, one should not have to go through the gristmill of law school to understand the simple truth that expressing an undefended (or ill-defended) belief in public, is about the same as BEGGING to be paddled in public, like some frat pledge at his initiation ceremony:

{*WHACK*}

"Thank you Sir! May I have another?"

{*WHACK*}




Oh, and I confess that while I was getting to the end there I was meaning to repeat the phrase "Head In Ass-ism," tie that in to the prior post about Ipsedixitism, and make some hopefully salient point. But as often is the case (as I do usually do these off the cuff) something else came to mind, and today, it was the Scene in the movie "Animal House" where the pledge at the mean, uncool frat is begging for more abuse.

That seemed to be a more powerful visual image; like Wile E. Coyote's long drop to the canyon floor.

{*SPLAT*}