Flag-waving

Last updated

Flag-waving is a fallacious argument or propaganda technique used to justify an action based on the undue connection to nationalism or patriotism or benefit for an idea, group or country. [1] [2] It is a variant of argumentum ad populum. [3] This fallacy appeals to emotion instead to logic of the audience aiming to manipulate them to win an argument. All ad populum fallacies are based on the presumption that the recipients already have certain beliefs, biases, and prejudices about the issue. [4]

If flag-waving is based on connecting to some symbol of patriotism or nationalism it is a form of appeal to stirring symbols which can be based on undue connection not only to nationalism but also to some religious or cultural symbols—for example, a politician appearing on TV with children, farmer, teacher, together with the "common" man, etc.

The act of flag-waving is a superficial display of support or loyalty to, for example, a nation or a political party. [5]

Related Research Articles

Ad hominem, short for argumentum ad hominem, refers to several types of arguments that are fallacious. Often nowadays this term refers to a rhetorical strategy where the speaker attacks the character, motive, or some other attribute of the person making an argument rather than attacking the substance of the argument itself. This avoids genuine debate by creating a personal attack as a diversion often using a totally irrelevant, but often highly charged attribute of the opponent's character or background. The most common form of this fallacy is "A" makes a claim of "fact", to which "B" asserts that "A" has a personal trait, quality or physical attribute that is repugnant thereby going entirely off-topic, and hence "B" concludes that "A" has their "fact" wrong - without ever addressing the point of the debate. Many contemporary politicians routinely use ad hominem attacks, some of which can be encapsulated to a derogatory nickname for a political opponent used instead of political argumentation.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Fallacy</span> Argument that uses faulty reasoning

A fallacy is the use of invalid or otherwise faulty reasoning in the construction of an argument that may appear to be well-reasoned if unnoticed. The term was introduced in the Western intellectual tradition by the Aristotelian De Sophisticis Elenchis.

Poisoning the well is a type of informal fallacy where adverse information about a target is preemptively presented to an audience, with the intention of discrediting or ridiculing something that the target person is about to say. Poisoning the well can be a special case of argumentum ad hominem, and the term was first used with this sense by John Henry Newman in his work Apologia Pro Vita Sua (1864).

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Media manipulation</span> Techniques in which partisans create an image that favours their interests

Media manipulation refers to orchestrated campaigns in which actors exploit the distinctive features of broadcasting mass communications or digital media platforms to mislead, misinform, or create a narrative that advance their interests and agendas.

An appeal to fear is a fallacy in which a person attempts to create support for an idea by attempting to increase fear towards an alternative. An appeal to fear is related to the broader strategy of fear appeal and is a common tactic in marketing, politics, and media (communication).

Appeal to flattery is a fallacy in which a person uses flattery, excessive compliments, in an attempt to appeal to their audience's vanity to win support for their side. It is also known as apple polishing, wheel greasing, brown nosing, appeal to pride, appeal to vanity or argumentum ad superbiam. The appeal to flattery is a specific kind of appeal to emotion.

Appeal to emotion or argumentum ad passiones is an informal fallacy characterized by the manipulation of the recipient's emotions in order to win an argument, especially in the absence of factual evidence. This kind of appeal to emotion is irrelevant to or distracting from the facts of the argument and encompasses several logical fallacies, including appeal to consequences, appeal to fear, appeal to flattery, appeal to pity, appeal to ridicule, appeal to spite, and wishful thinking.

Argument from fallacy is the formal fallacy of analyzing an argument and inferring that, since it contains a fallacy, its conclusion must be false. It is also called argument to logic, the fallacy fallacy, the fallacist's fallacy, and the bad reasons fallacy.

Appeal to ridicule is an informal fallacy which presents an opponent's argument as absurd, ridiculous, or humorous, and therefore not worthy of serious consideration.

The association fallacy is a formal logical fallacy that asserts that properties of one thing must also be properties of another thing if both things belong to the same group. For example, a fallacious arguer may claim that "bears are animals, and bears are dangerous; therefore your dog, which is also an animal, must be dangerous."

In rhetoric, a glittering generality or glowing generality is an emotionally appealing phrase so closely associated with highly-valued concepts and beliefs that it carries conviction without supporting information or reason. Such highly valued concepts attract general approval and acclaim. Their appeal is to emotions such as love of country and home, and desire for peace, freedom, glory, and honor. They ask for approval without examination of the reason. They are typically used in propaganda posters/advertisements and used by propagandists and politicians.

In rhetoric, an argumentum ad captandum, "for capturing" the gullibility of the naïve among the listeners or readers, is an unsound, specious argument designed to appeal to the emotions rather than to the mind. It is used to describe "claptrap or meretricious attempts to catch popular favor or applause."

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Informal fallacy</span> Form of incorrect argument in natural language

Informal fallacies are a type of incorrect argument in natural language. The source of the error is not just due to the form of the argument, as is the case for formal fallacies, but can also be due to their content and context. Fallacies, despite being incorrect, usually appear to be correct and thereby can seduce people into accepting and using them. These misleading appearances are often connected to various aspects of natural language, such as ambiguous or vague expressions, or the assumption of implicit premises instead of making them explicit.

Persuasive writing is a form of writing intended to convince or influence readers to accept a particular idea or opinion and to inspire action. A wide variety of writings, such as criticisms, reviews, reaction papers, editorials, proposals, advertisements, and brochures, utilize different persuasion techniques to influence readers. Persuasive writing can also be employed in indoctrination. It is often confused with opinion writing; however, while both may share similar themes, persuasive writing is backed by facts, whereas opinion writing is supported by emotions.

Appeal to the stone, also known as argumentum ad lapidem, is a logical fallacy that dismisses an argument as untrue or absurd. The dismissal is made by stating or reiterating that the argument is absurd, without providing further argumentation. This theory is closely tied to proof by assertion due to the lack of evidence behind the statement and its attempt to persuade without providing any evidence.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Propaganda techniques</span> Methods of mind manipulation, often based on logical fallacies

Propaganda techniques are methods used in propaganda to convince an audience to believe what the propagandist wants them to believe. Many propaganda techniques are based on socio-psychological research. Many of these same techniques can be classified as logical fallacies or abusive power and control tactics.

In argumentation theory, an argumentum ad populum is a fallacious argument which is based on claiming a truth or affirming something is good because many people think so.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Soviet patriotism</span> Nationalism theory developed by Vladimir Lenin

Soviet patriotism is the socialist patriotism involving emotional and cultural attachment of the Soviet people to the Soviet Union as their homeland. It is also referred to as Soviet nationalism.

An argument from authority is a form of argument in which the opinion of an authority figure is used as evidence to support an argument.

References

  1. Ferrán Valls i Taberner; Chia-Jui Cheng (1993). Ciencia política comparada y derecho y economía en las relaciones internacionales: estudios en homenaje a Ferran Valls i Taberner. Cátedra de Historia del Derecho y de las Instituciones, Facultad de Derecho, Universidad de Málaga. p. 7219. ISBN   9788460460589 . Retrieved 10 August 2013. Today, indeed, flag-waving has become a quite common generic term denoting the deliberate appeal to nationalistic emotions and prejudices.
  2. Nicole Hein (7 November 2011). Spinning Coverage: An Analysis of The New York Times' Reporting on the War in Iraq in Light of the U.S. Administration's Spin and Propaganda Efforts. GRIN Verlag. p. 33. ISBN   978-3-656-04831-2 . Retrieved 9 August 2013. Flag-waving is a popular propaganda technique, meaning that an action is justified "on the grounds that doing [what is promoted, in this case support the war] will make one more patriotic, or in some way benefit a group, country, or idea.
  3. Daniel Harry Cohen (1 January 2004). Arguments and Metaphors in Philosophy. University Press of America. p. 59. ISBN   978-0-7618-2677-4 . Retrieved 9 August 2013. ...ad Hominen ridicule, ad Misehcordiam tears, or ad Populum flag-waving - all logical fallacies...
  4. Kathleen Bell (February 1990). Developing arguments: strategies for reaching audiences . Wadsworth Pub. Co. p.  284. ISBN   9780534121921 . Retrieved 9 August 2013. The ad populum argument presumes that the audience already holds a particular attitude and specific beliefs on the issue.
  5. Allied Chambers (1998). The Chambers Dictionary. Allied Publishers. p. 609. ISBN   978-81-86062-25-8 . Retrieved 14 August 2013.