Advanced lesson exploring fallacies that arise in institutional contexts and civic life. Students learn to recognize how concepts like free speech, community interests, loyalty, and institutional inertia are misused in arguments. These fallacies are particularly prevalent in political discourse, community debates, and organizational decision-making where abstract principles are invoked to deflect from substantive issues.
Invoking free speech or freedom of expression principles to deflect from criticism of the content of one's speech, conflating legal protection from government censorship with immunity from social consequences, criticism, or private platform moderation. Often involves claiming that any criticism or consequence constitutes 'censorship' or violation of free speech rights.
Opposing a development, facility, or policy that one might support in principle or for others, specifically because of its proximity to oneself or one's community. This involves raising ostensibly principled objections that mask underlying 'not near me' motivations, often deploying selective concern for issues like property values, character of neighborhood, traffic, or safety that wouldn't be raised if the project were elsewhere.
Treating the current state of affairs, existing policy, or default option as inherently superior or as requiring less justification than alternatives, not based on its merits but simply because it is the current arrangement. This involves demanding higher standards of proof for change than for maintaining the status quo, or acting as if defaults are neutral when they embody specific choices and values.