From Rationalwiki | Cogito ergo sum Logic and rhetoric |
| Key articles |
| General logic |
| Bad logic |
“”You are going to approve one of the biggest tax cuts in history. You are going to approve one of the biggest tax increases in history. You are going to drive business out. Your regulations are a disaster, and you're going to increase regulations all over the place. And by the way, my tax cut is the biggest since Ronald Reagan.
|
| —Donald Trump, 2016 presidential debate[1] |
Hyperbole (or hype) is the use of exaggeration to make a point. It is completely and utterly unlike any other rhetorical technique, the single most powerful way to communicate any concept ever conceived.
Hyperbole is inevitably found in advertising and press releases by companies as well as universities. The field of artificial intelligence itself has a culture of hype.[2]:235-239,251-255
Hyperbolic fallacy (also known as "'inductive hyperbole") occurs when something is stated much more strongly than the observations behind it support.
Hyperbolic fallacy is common in science reporting. Science reporters try to make science interesting to the general public, and all too often do this by exaggerating the importance of certain findings, "hyping" them as "breakthroughs" that "entirely upset" our previous assumptions, etc.
In fact, it is in the nature of inductive sampling that no conclusion is guaranteed to be true. There is always a degree of uncertainty, and always a possibility that the entire study might prove wanting.
This constant emphasis on breakthroughs in science may prime some listeners to accepting more wild claims of pseudoscience — because if science can do it, why can't the nice man with a website find a cancer cure?
The "truthful hyperbole", which is an oxymoron, according to Trump (or his pseudo-autobiographer[note 1]) never hurts (in real estate).[4] People who know Trump seem to think he doesn't understand the difference between the truth and a lie.[5]
Even the Gartner Hype Cycle (not an actual cycle), which while looking plausible and purportedly described the phases of hyperbole qualitatively for new technology, was a load of hype that was put forward by Gartner business consultants in 2003.[6] The Economist analyzed new technologies to see whether they fit the model described by Gartner. They found that new technologies rarely fit the model, concluding:[7]
“”We find, in short, that the cycle is a rarity. Tracing breakthrough technologies over time, only a small share—perhaps a fifth—move from innovation to excitement to despondency to widespread adoption. Lots of tech becomes widely used without such a rollercoaster ride. Others go from boom to bust, but do not come back. We estimate that of all the forms of tech which fall into the trough of disillusionment, six in ten do not rise again. Our conclusions are similar to those of Mr [Michael] Mullany: “An alarming number of technology trends are flashes in the pan.”
|
Lee Vinsel, a professor of Science, Technology and Society, coined the term criti-hype to refer to a form of self-criticism that is simultaneously hyperbolically promotional, giving warnings about distant and implausible dangers that make a technology seem more powerful than it is to act as a distraction from more immediate and likely dangers. He gives as examples:[8]
Categories: [Informal fallacies]