A Story of Rivals

   A couple of months that feel more like years ago, I randomly signed up for a free ancestry site called FamilySearch. I didn't expect much, but thought it couldn't hurt. Now, my mom and I are blown away by the family history that has been uncovered that we never even knew about. Crazy, interesting stories and people we never would have guessed we were related to.

   All this mess that's been going on lately has gotten me thinking about these people in my past. Some of them no one would ever guess we were related to. One interesting thing we've discovered about our family is that, besides a somewhat odd tendency to always go by middle names (call me Marie, why don't you?), our family has an interesting tendency to marry the people our ancestors fought against, possibly with a long history of prejudice.

   Among my ancestors are several memebers of Germanic tribes, including Goths, Visigoths, Franks, Vandals, Saxons, and others. There are several tribal kings, among them several Saxon kings and Frankish kings (who were probably named Louis). The bitter rivals of the Germanic tribes, not counting each other, were the Romans, and I am also very likely descended from a line of Roman senators and consuls which includes one dictator.

   Of my ancestors from the Germanic tribes, some are Britons who were left behind after the Romans abandoned Britain, and some are of the Saxons that invaded. I have ancestors that fought against the Norman invasion and ancestors that were Normans given noble lands and castles as a result of the Norman invasion and one ancestor that led the Norman invasion (William the Conqueror). I am descended from Vikings and the English king that kicked the Vikings out of England. I am descended from Irishmen and from Englishmen, who have a long history of hatred and prejudice towards each other (though it's mostly one way, the English oppressing the Irish) and from Welshmen, who are still being oppressed by the English, and from two of Robert the Bruce's sisters (their kids married each other, and yes, I'm grossed out), who were rivals with, you guessed it, the English. (Can we all agree that the English have a long history of prejudice and rivalry?) I'm descended from English kings and French kings who most definitely fought wars against each other. 

   My French and German ancestors fought each other, and so did my German and Polish ancestors. I have ancestors on both sides of World War One and an ancestor who tried to fight in the war for America and wound up staying home. I have an ancestor who's a Native American and possibly the daughter of Pocahontas and Kocoum, and several not-so-nice ancestors from Jamestown.

   And then we come to my hero, Elizabeth Key Grinstead. She was the daughter of a slave from Africa and Thomas Key, an English slave owner. At the age of six, her father was sued for paternity and forced to provide for his daughter. He made her an indentured servant and died shortly after. He was a jerk, but he did make his friend who held the indenture promise to treat her like his daughter and take her with him if he moved back to England. The friend did move back to England, but instead of taking Elizabeth with him, he sold her indenture to another man to pay off some debts. This other man kept Elizabeth nine years after her indenture was up. Elizabeth could have become bitter and angry. She could have hated the man who enslaved her and any of his nationality. She had no reason not to hate the English.

   When Elizabeth met a young indentured servant from England named William Grinstead, she didn't hate him. Instead, they fell in love. They got married, as much as they were legally allowed as indentured servants. They had a child named John. Then the man that owned her indenture died. Elizabeth and her son were listed as slaves. They were going to be sold off in an estate sale. But William fought for her freedom in court after court, eventually going to the House of Burgesses and convincing the court to free her. She received compensation for the nine years she was enslaved over the terms of her indenture. As soon as William's indenture was up, they were married officially and had another son, who was also named William. This is the man who was my ancestor. They lived happy lives, though short ones, because life expectancy was super short in those days. (Unfortunately, Virginia changed the laws after William's death so no slave could ever win his or her freedom the same way William won Elizabeth's freedom.)

   Some of these rivalries have died away, but some of them are still with us today. Hatred in this world is so common; it's rarer to find freedom from hatred and prejudice than to find someone that is ruled by it. I'm not here to judge who is right and who is wrong in the conflict that is tearing our nation apart these days. The rivalries my ancestors fought and believed in were legitimate rivalries on both sides. Some were more balanced than others in crimes committed against each other, and some were steeped in oppression of one by another (probably by the English, if we're all being honest). But these rivalries and long histories of hatred didn't hold some people back. In the midst of these crimes and rivalries, somewhere along the line, some of these people put aside their differences and their crimes and the crimes of their ancestors and decided to forge a new history, a different history, a history that ended in love and family and new life.

   I am not my ancestors. I cannot be praised for their good deeds or condemned for their mistakes. I cannot change the things I've done in the past, for good or for ill. Neither can anyone else. All we can choose to do is move forward and forge a new future. We can choose to react to horrific crimes in emotion and anger, we can perpetuate rivalries, or we can choose to move above that. We can react with kindness instead of anger, love instead of hate. We can choose to pursue justice without hatred and end corruption without corrupting ourselves. We can make a difference while being the difference.

   This year has been one punch after the other, and who knows if it's going to stop? Hatred is not going to stop. It's been in this world since the Garden of Eden and it's going to be here until Judgement Day comes and the trumpet sounds and Jesus comes back to this world to take us home. Crimes are not going to stop. Evil men are always going to exist. We can choose to live in hatred with them, as some of our ancestors did, or we can choose to live above that, put the past behind us, and forge a new future.

   After all, it's what my ancestors would have wanted.

   Recompense to no man evil for evil: procure things honest in the sight of all men. If it be possible, as much as in you is, have peace with all men. Dearly beloved, avenge not yourselves, but give place unto wrath: for it is written, Vengeance is mine: I will repay, saith the Lord. --Romans 12:17-19

This is my commandment, that you love one another as I have loved you. --John 15:12

Your Argument is Invalid

   Ah, arguments. All of us get into them, and since this is a presidential election year, almost everything is going to turn into an argument these days, especially in the media. In this era of fake news, the ability to recognize when an argument has faulty logic is crucial. Faulty logic permeates the world we live in. Here are some of the most common examples. 

Ad Hominem Attack

   Ad Hominem is Latin for "To the man." This fallacy is when a person tries to attack an argument by attacking the person that presented it. 

   "Luke, I am your father. You have to eat your vegetables. Vegetables are good for you!"

  "That's not true. That's impossible! You're a Sith Lord and have murdered millions of people. Vegetables can't be good for you."

   While it may be true that Luke Skywalker's father is a Sith Lord that has murdered millions of people, that doesn't mean that vegetables aren't good for you. The content of your character doesn't determine the validity of your argument.

Via Pinterest

Genetic Fallacy

   This is when someone attacks an argument because of where it began, how it began, or who began it.

   "I never buy Volkswagens. If you buy a Volkswagen, you are an anti-Semite and a Nazi."

   "What? Why?"

   "You know who started Volkswagen, right? It was Adolf Hitler."

   Just because Volkswagen was started by Adolf Hitler to be a "people's car" for the Germans doesn't mean that the company today is an evil one or that no one should buy Volkswagens. 

 
The "Adolf Hitler" Attack

   This is often either one of the first two or a combination. The "Adolf Hitler" attack is when someone either brings up that Adolf Hitler believed that or simply calls you a Nazi and thinks they've invalidated your argument. "Nazi" is just a form of name-calling and easy to combat. Even if it's true, the Ad Hominem attack still applies. Just because you're a horrible person doesn't mean your argument is illogical. 

   "I believe we should build more highways that stretch across the country to enhance ease of travel for our citizens."

   "That's wrong. We shouldn't do that. You know who also believed that? Adolf Hitler. Ever heard of the Autobahn?"

   "So you believe anything Adolf Hitler believed has to be wrong?"

   "Of course! I think we can all agree that if Adolf Hitler believed something, it has to be wrong."

   "You do know that Adolf Hitler was a vegetarian, right?"

Tu Quoque

   Tu Quoque is Latin for "You too." This fallacy is saying someone's argument doesn't count because they do it too, or an argument from hypocrisy.

   "Darth Sidious, you shouldn't kill Luke. It's not right."

   "Oh, come on, Vader, like you've never murdered someone's son before!"

   Just because Vader murders people doesn't make it okay for you to murder people too. Two wrongs don't make a right. Besides, maybe Vader's seen the error of his ways and realizes murder is wrong and is trying to make sure no one goes down the path he did.

Faulty Appeal to Authority

   Appeal to an authority is saying something is true because an authority in the subject being discussed said it was true. A faulty appeal to authority is when we appeal to someone who isn't actually an authority on the subject being discussed. For example, in this pandemic, everyone's turning to Doctor Fauci to tell us what we should do in this pandemic. No offense to Doctor Fauci, I'm sure he's a nice guy and good in his field of medicine, but he isn't an epidemiologist, a doctor who studies epidemics, and he hasn't practiced medicine in twenty years. Not everyone who has a doctorate of medicine is an authority on everything to do with medicine. I could ask a podiatrist on whether wearing face masks is likely to stop the spread of a virus, but I doubt the podiatrist would know much more than I do on the subject.

   This is also what happens when movie stars' opinions on anything other than acting are appealed to, or when the topic is controversial and only one authority in the subject is appealed to. Just because one legitimate authority in the field believes something doesn't mean there aren't plenty of other legitimate authorities that have different opinions. This also applies to the example above.

Appeal to the People or Bandwagon

   This fallacy is when we claim we are right because a lot of people agree with us. As the Bluedorns say (see more on them at the end of the blogpost), "The general public is rarely a proper authority on any subject." This is also a common propaganda technique.

   "You should buy this car. Everyone's buying it!"

   "Everyone believes the Empire is a good form of government! You should too, my son."

   Just because everyone believes it doesn't make it right.

   

Straw Man

   This is when someone changes the argument or says their opponent is arguing something ridiculous to make it easier to refute the argument and then attacks that.

   "I don't think building the Death Star is a good idea, Tarkin. It's a waste of money, and using it will turn the rebels against us."

   "I can't believe you said that, Vader! The Empire must defend itself from brutal terrorist attacks. How can you say we shouldn't spend any money on defense?"

   Attacking an irrelevant position does nothing to refute the actual argument being presented. Vader is entirely right that the Death Star is a waste of money and actually drives more people to the rebellion than it deters.

   

Part-to-Whole
   This is where people assume the character of the parts is also the character of the whole.
   "Look, Padme, I made this cake from the best ingredients money could buy. It's got to be delicious!"
   "You cooked it for so long the apartment caught on fire, Anakin. The cake is not delicious."

   Just because something is true of the parts doesn't make it true of the whole.

Whole-to-Part

   This is the opposite of the part-to-whole fallacy. This fallacy assumes that because something is true of the whole, it must be true of its parts.

   "The Empire is responsible for the murder of millions, has enslaved trillions of sentients across the galaxy, and destroyed planets. Lieutenant Han Solo is a murderer, a slaver, and a planet-destroyer."

   The whole is much more than the sum of its parts. 

Either-Or

   This fallacy sets up a false dilemma between two choices when really there are many more choices than just two. For example, the media seems to be portraying the whole face mask dilemma as this: Either you are a Democrat and believe the CDC and are wearing face masks, or you are a Republican that refuses to listen to common sense and are not wearing a face mask. People could be refusing to wear a face mask for any number of reasons. For instance, I don't want to wear a face mask because my moderate to severe seasonal allergies restrict my airways to the point where I can't breathe in a face mask. Some people don't want to wear a face mask because it's 90 freaking degrees outside, or it soon will be, and they will pass out if they wear a face mask in that kind of heat. Some people don't want to wear a face mask because they are going swimming, and a wet cloth plastered over the nose and mouth is a key component in waterboarding. Others don't want to wear a face mask because they just don't like being told what to do. In many cases, there are much more than two sides to an argument or dilemma and representing it as an either-or option is misleading or downright false.

Hasty Generalizations

   Hasty generalizations are the reason I don't trust any polls that are reported in the media. A hasty generalization is generalizing about a class based on a small or poor sample. For instance, one poll on the previous presidential election that was reported as a national poll had a sample that consisted of 1,000 people from Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, plus a handful of people from the suburbs and countryside of Oklahoma. Obviously, this is not a big enough sample size, and Oklahoma city dwellers are a very poor sample for the entire nation. In addition, many phone political polls hang up on anybody that answers "Yes" to the question "Are you affiliated with any political campaign, either now or in the past?" when, if you wanted a proper sample of voters, the people affiliated with political campaigns are the ones most likely to vote. Unfortunately, this type of polling is very common, which is the reason I don't trust polls.

Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc

   Or, in English, "After this, therefore because of this." This assumes that because A happened before B, A must be the cause of B.

   "Anakin Skywalker slept shirtless, and not long after, he turned to the Dark Side. I think it's clear I need to go to Tatooine to make sure Luke never sleeps shirtless and turns to the Dark Side."

   "Pretty sure, I am, that the cause of his turn, that is not."

   This is akin to "Correlations do not equal causations." For instance, suicide rates rise when toothbrush sales plummet. Obviously, people are killing themselves because they have bad teeth.

   

Appeal to Fear
   And here we begin the manipulative propaganda techniques.
   "Every other prosthetic hand causes your nerves to die and your arm to rot. Buy CorusMedicine's prosthetic hands today!"
   "Leia, I want my prosthetic hand to be CorusMedicine. I don't want my nerves to die and my arm to rot off."
   This is all the commercials that try to scare you into buying their product or voting for their candidate. Don't fall for it.

Appeal to Pity

   *Sad music begins* "Many animals are left out in the cold every year." *shows videos of dogs shivering in the cold* "A small monthly donation of $19.95 to ASPCA can save these poor animals from a lifetime of misery."

   This is when commercials or what have you try to guilt you into doing what they want. Just because you feel bad doesn't mean the argument is sound. If you have enough money to film all those miserable dogs, why don't you use that money to help them?

   

Exigency

   "Only three left in stock. Buy today!"

   This is when we are told we must go along with their argument because we don't have the time to do otherwise.

   

Repetition
   "Head on. Apply directly to the forehead. Head on. Apply directly to the forehead. Head on. Apply directly to the forehead."
   This form of propaganda simply repeats something until people accept it as true.

Snob Appeal

   "The few, the proud, the Marines."

   This is when someone tries to convince you that you should do something because no one else is doing it.

   "Come on, Luke, only two people in the entire galaxy are Sith Lords! You should become one too! Then you'll be one of only three people that are allowed to learn the Sith teachings."

   Just because no one else does it isn't a reason for you to. Maybe there's a good reason no one else is a Sith Lord.

   Don't fall for logical fallacies. Just because an argument sounds good doesn't mean it's a good argument.

   Many thanks to Nathaniel and Hans Bluedorn, whose book The Fallacy Detective taught me about many of these fallacies and encouraged me to think logically about the world around me.