Censorship and Forced hypothesis fallacy?
  • AndreasJ
    8
    broken_window.png
    Good morning everyone,

    Adam did in the past throw a stone at a window that broke it.

    Anna presents a hypothesis in the local Facebook group that Adam is responsible for the broken window. Her hypothesis is however censored and erased by the admin who is Adams friend.

    Adams friend writes that he "knows the past" 100% and that the window was broken in a way that is consistent ONLY with a strong wind picking up a small stone. He also says that it can't have been a person throwing a stone at the window and any hypothesis claiming this as the reason for the broken window will get banned and censored.

    A month goes by and another town member asks in the Facebook group: What happened to the window in house X before? What phenomena happened in the past that broke it?

    Several members of the group write that they believe it was a strong wind picking up a small stone and that there are no other hypotheses being proposed that could explain it.

    What kind of logical and scientific fallacies are involved in this scenario?

    Forced hypothesis fallacy?

    Thanks
    AndreasJ Options
  • ssu
    8.7k
    Several members of the group write that they believe it was a strong wind picking up a small stone and that there are no other hypotheses being proposed that could explain it. — AndreasJ

    Couldn't one reason from the above that anybody saying anything else than that will be instantly banned from the site? Just that "a strong wind" would be the only hypothesis that could explain it is so delirious that something has to be wrong with this picture.

    What comes to mind are the over-enthusiastic applause and cheers the dictator gets with nobody daring to be the first person to stop cheering.
    ssu Options
  • T Clark
    14k
    Her hypothesis is however censored and erased by the admin who is Adams friend. — AndreasJ

    Did the admin admit that he deleted the post because he was Adam's friend? If not, how do we know this? You indicated that the accusation was an "hypothesis." My first assumption would be that the post was removed because it was not supported with enough evidence and because of possible liability reasons.

    The stone being blown by the wind is a pretty silly explanation. It would make more sense to say that the window was broken by a mysterious one-armed man.

    A free drink to the first one who can identify the TV/movie reference.
    T Clark Options
bold
italic
underline
strike
code
quote
ulist
image
url
mention
reveal
youtube
tweet
Add a Comment

Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!

Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.

Sign In Create Account

Categories