Posts: 3226
Threads: 244
Joined: April 17, 2012
Reputation:
54
Chronological Snobberry Fallacy
August 11, 2013 at 3:24 am
(This post was last modified: August 11, 2013 at 3:24 am by Tea Earl Grey Hot.)
I see this fallacy called Chronological Snobbery (a term coined by Robert M Price I believe) a lot. It involves dismissing an idea or argument because of it being too old or out of fashion. It can occur in any context but I see it most commonly occur among those in academic fields.
Its form is as follows
If an idea is old or out of fashion, it is false.
x is old or out of fashion.
Therefore, x is false.
Here's an example I heard in a conversation last year:
Me: "...Willam Malloch's article gave strong evidence and reason that the opening of Bach's overtures were originally intended to be taken at the same tempo as the following fugues."
Other person: "what year was the article published?"
Me: "1983."
Other person: "ohhhh, yeah musicology has moved on."
Apparently arguments have an expiration date.
You could make an inductive argument of course that in rigorous fields, outdated ideas are likely to be false ideas but that alone can't definitively refute any modern usage of out of fashion thinking in every case. There's still the possibility that the current generation has it wrong in some areas.
My ignore list
"The lord doesn't work in mysterious ways, but in ways that are indistinguishable from his nonexistence."
-- George Yorgo Veenhuyzen quoted by John W. Loftus in The End of Christianity (p. 103).
Posts: 30825
Threads: 1382
Joined: March 15, 2013
Reputation:
152
RE: Chronological Snobberry Fallacy
August 11, 2013 at 3:33 am
I tend to apply the fallacy to literature. If the book is more than thirty years old, I tend to dismiss it as useless and boring.
"Never trust a fox. Looks like a dog, behaves like a cat."
~ Erin Hunter
Posts: 2279
Threads: 22
Joined: February 16, 2013
Reputation:
64
RE: Chronological Snobberry Fallacy
August 11, 2013 at 3:46 am
... but as men get older, all the better.
So another fallacy would be:
X is old, or out of fashion.
Therefore, X is hot.
Thank you, and good night.
(searches other threads to pick on)
Pointing around: "Fuck you, fuck you, fuck you, you're cool, fuck you, I'm out!"
Half Baked
"Let the atheists come to me, and stop keeping them away, because the kingdom of heathens belongs to people like these." -Saint Bacon
Posts: 14259
Threads: 48
Joined: March 1, 2009
Reputation:
80
RE: Chronological Snobberry Fallacy
August 11, 2013 at 4:16 am
(August 11, 2013 at 3:46 am)Ivy Wrote: ... but as men get older, all the better.
I'd like to keep that phallusy going
Posts: 2171
Threads: 4
Joined: July 24, 2013
Reputation:
33
RE: Chronological Snobberry Fallacy
August 11, 2013 at 5:29 am
(This post was last modified: August 11, 2013 at 5:31 am by Captain Colostomy.)
If we could just dismiss antiquated religions as readily.
(August 11, 2013 at 4:16 am)fr0d0 Wrote: (August 11, 2013 at 3:46 am)Ivy Wrote: ... but as men get older, all the better.
I'd like to keep that phallusy going
Boooo! Hiss! 
Posts: 3817
Threads: 5
Joined: November 19, 2012
Reputation:
54
RE: Chronological Snobberry Fallacy
August 11, 2013 at 9:11 am
(August 11, 2013 at 3:24 am)teaearlgreyhot Wrote: I see this fallacy called Chronological Snobbery (a term coined by Robert M Price I believe) a lot. It involves dismissing an idea or argument because of it being too old or out of fashion. It can occur in any context but I see it most commonly occur among those in academic fields.
Its form is as follows
If an idea is old or out of fashion, it is false.
x is old or out of fashion.
Therefore, x is false.
Here's an example I heard in a conversation last year:
Me: "...Willam Malloch's article gave strong evidence and reason that the opening of Bach's overtures were originally intended to be taken at the same tempo as the following fugues."
Other person: "what year was the article published?"
Me: "1983."
Other person: "ohhhh, yeah musicology has moved on."
Apparently arguments have an expiration date.
You could make an inductive argument of course that in rigorous fields, outdated ideas are likely to be false ideas but that alone can't definitively refute any modern usage of out of fashion thinking in every case. There's still the possibility that the current generation has it wrong in some areas.
Your argument is sooooo last year. 
Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
Posts: 9147
Threads: 83
Joined: May 22, 2013
Reputation:
46
RE: Chronological Snobberry Fallacy
August 11, 2013 at 9:16 am
(August 11, 2013 at 9:11 am)Chas Wrote: Your argument is sooooo last year. So is that expression. 
Posts: 2968
Threads: 10
Joined: June 2, 2012
Reputation:
44
RE: Chronological Snobberry Fallacy
August 11, 2013 at 9:34 am
(August 11, 2013 at 3:33 am)Maelstrom Wrote: I tend to apply the fallacy to literature. If the book is more than thirty years old, I tend to dismiss it as useless and boring. WHAT? How very dare you!
Posts: 3188
Threads: 8
Joined: December 9, 2011
Reputation:
31
RE: Chronological Snobberry Fallacy
August 11, 2013 at 10:32 am
(August 11, 2013 at 3:24 am)teaearlgreyhot Wrote: I see this fallacy called Chronological Snobbery (a term coined by Robert M Price I believe) a lot. It involves dismissing an idea or argument because of it being too old or out of fashion. It can occur in any context but I see it most commonly occur among those in academic fields.
Its form is as follows
If an idea is old or out of fashion, it is false.
x is old or out of fashion.
Therefore, x is false.
Here's an example I heard in a conversation last year:
Me: "...Willam Malloch's article gave strong evidence and reason that the opening of Bach's overtures were originally intended to be taken at the same tempo as the following fugues."
Other person: "what year was the article published?"
Me: "1983."
Other person: "ohhhh, yeah musicology has moved on."
Apparently arguments have an expiration date.
You could make an inductive argument of course that in rigorous fields, outdated ideas are likely to be false ideas but that alone can't definitively refute any modern usage of out of fashion thinking in every case. There's still the possibility that the current generation has it wrong in some areas.
The expiration date can be determined by many factors - such as a new and better ideas coming along or the contextual applicability. When we say the field of study has moved on, the implication is clear - that there is something better out there that it has moved on to. Whether or not an idea is outdated doesn't have anything to do with how old it is, it is determined by better options being available.
For example, we refer to many aspects of Freud's psychoanalytic theory as outdated because we've better explanations available to us. But the germ theory, which is older than that, is not regarded as such.
|
