Raw milk from a California dairy is recalled after routine testing detected the bird flu virus
AP's November 25, 2024 report on raw milk recalled after bird-flu detection is a good case for arguments that romanticize the 'natural' while minimizing risk. It makes the tradeoff concrete: appeals to purity and tradition can feel reassuring even when the biological evidence points the other way. The fallacy here is Special pleading: someone asks for an exception to a rule or standard but does not provide a relevant reason for why the favored case should be exempt. That matters here because exceptions can be justified, but they need a principled reason. A better analysis would remember that mere attachment to the favored case is not enough.
Associated Press · 2024-11-25
How an unsubstantiated, anonymous affidavit about the ABC presidential debate was amplified online
PolitiFact's September 20, 2024 reconstruction of the fake ABC whistleblower affidavit is especially valuable because it shows how public figures shared the claim while conceding they did not know whether it was true. That is a live, well-documented case of conjecture and amplification outrunning authentication. The fallacy here is Special pleading: someone asks for an exception to a rule or standard but does not provide a relevant reason for why the favored case should be exempt. That matters here because exceptions can be justified, but they need a principled reason. A better analysis would remember that mere attachment to the favored case is not enough.
PolitiFact · 2024-09-20
Political actors often demand strict accountability, civility, or transparency for opponents while inventing excuses for why their own side should be judged differently. The fallacy here is Special pleading: someone asks for an exception to a rule or standard but does not provide a relevant reason for why the favored case should be exempt. That matters here because exceptions can be justified, but they need a principled reason. A better analysis would remember that mere attachment to the favored case is not enough.
Religious and ideological arguments often exempt cherished claims from the evidence standards applied to ordinary claims. The fallacy here is Special pleading: someone asks for an exception to a rule or standard but does not provide a relevant reason for why the favored case should be exempt. That matters here because exceptions can be justified, but they need a principled reason. A better analysis would remember that mere attachment to the favored case is not enough.
