The noncentral fallacy - the worst argument in the world?
Read the original on LessWrong →
Summary
Coins the 'noncentral fallacy,' Scott's nominee for the worst argument in the world: 'X is in a category whose archetypal member gives us a certain emotional reaction; therefore apply that reaction to X, even though X is not a central member.' The clean worked example — Martin Luther King was technically a 'criminal,' but lacks the features (greed, preying on the innocent, weakening society) that make us dislike the archetypal criminal — then a deliberately balanced battery of political instances (abortion is murder; genetic engineering is eugenics; evo psych is sexist; capital punishment is murder; affirmative action is racist; taxation is theft), each shown to smuggle in the archetype's emotional charge while subtracting the relevant distinguishing information. Notes the rhetorical trap (the instinct to deny 'King wasn't a criminal!' concedes the framing) and the proper response ('No, why should I subtract relevant information?'), plus edits distinguishing it from poisoning-the-well.
Why this score
Quality 81 · Excellent. High-Excellent; a foundational, still-constantly-cited rationalist concept, argued rigorously and completely and stripped (in a later edit) of jargon for general readers. As it reads now it cleanly names a pattern behind a huge fraction of bad category-based argument. Co-tier with the census's other 81s (WebMD, Missing-Heritability); below the 82+ band mainly for length/scope. 81.
Claude’s paradigm shift 66 · Notable shift. Notable shift. Stove had run a 'worst argument' contest, but Scott's reformulation as the archetypal-member/noncentral fallacy is original and became the canonical version of the idea in rationalist discourse. 66.
Real-world impact 4 · Moderate. 'The noncentral fallacy' ('the worst argument in the world') became a foundational, still-constantly-cited rationalist concept naming a pattern behind a huge fraction of bad category-based argument. Broad, durable conceptual uptake, but confined to intellectual discourse with no material change — mid RWI.