Love is a Fallacy: Max Shulman Essay Example

Introduction

In this short story, Max Shulman recounts a student's efforts towards his love interest. Polly strives to become a fit wife, mother, and hostess. Polly's educative process entails a number of fallacies including but not limited to Hasty generalization, Post Hoc, Contradictory premises, Poisoning the well (Ad Hominem), Ad Misericordiam, as well as Appeal to pity Fallacies, otherwise referred to as "errors in argument" are employed as a demonstration of improper use of one's reasoning. The narrator, however, employs the fallacies to disclose his logical thinking against true love, through his unjustified and ungrounded arguments pertaining Petey and Polly's intelligence and wit, manipulating them to achieve his anti-men, anti-women motives while downplaying the emotional and intuitive elements of love. For instance, the fallacy "Hypothesis Contrary to the fact" is a clear demonstration of Max's guilt in misusing logic to win-over Polly's affection. Notably, the author expresses his opinions and feelings on love through the logical fallacies enabling readers to comprehend his point of view on matters love (Shulman 47).

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Save 25%

Hasty generalization

The fallacy, normally employed to depict insufficient sample helps writers to draw significant conclusions from insufficient sources and unrepresentative evidence. In one of his sentences, Max generalizes his inability to speak French. Using that insufficient evidence, he concludes that nobody at the college can speak French because he and a few people that he knew weren't able to speak the language.

Example: "You can't speak French. Petey Birch can't speak French. I must, therefore, conclude that no one at the University can speak French." Another common example is the argument that "youths and juniors who engage in school shoot-outs watch violent shows and video games." Generalizing one experience in one's office may not necessarily demonstrate the intention of the office to perform or be productive (Fowler, Jane and Murray 197-199).

Ad hominem

In his arguments against man, the narrator aims to present the person that upholds or asserts his arguments as a fallacy against Ad Hominem. In so doing, Max persuades Polly into distrusting Petey, who according to him failed to keep his promise to exchange the raccoon coat and take up Polly as his love. Example: "Two men are in a debate. The first one gets up and says, 'My opponent is a notorious liar. You can't believe a word he is going to say.'"

In so doing, he attacks the opposing man rather than the opposing argument itself. For example, dismissing the findings of nuclear waste scientists just because he had previously been subjected to emotional and mental treatment procedures. In this case, the fallacy attacks the opposing man (the scientist) instead of attacking the argument itself.

False Analogy

The narrator uses untrue analogies to show that the argument is wrong to a large extent. He argues that during examinations and assessments, students ought to be allowed to check out answers from their textbooks. He further argues that people fail to make analogies out of the test that necessitates carpenters, lawyers, and doctors refer to their notes during their practice while students are denied reference. An analogy can never prove points but rather illustrate them. Analogies like "if you want to win over a woman, give her promises even if they are not fulfilled as it has worked in most relationships". Such analogies assume complete likeness and lack evidential representativeness. Fowler, Jane, and Murray (197-198) call it an exaggeration of simple, unrepresentative similarities in any given analogy while ignoring fundamental, significant differences.

Contradictory Premise

This fallacy occurs when an argument's premises are contradictory, hence no argument at all. In his short story, Max employs the fallacy when he argues that God is unable to do a single thing, questioning Polly whether God has the ability to make a stone too heavy for him to lift. In his presentation, the narrator argues that there can't be any existent immovable object in the existence of irresistible forces. As such, immovable objects can only be in place if there is no irresistible force. Example: "If God can do anything, can He make a stone so heavy that He can't lift it?"(Shulman 47-48).

Appeal to Prejudice

This fallacy entails claims an individual's claim that can be adequately supported and defended if the argument emphasizes a belief or attitude that majority of the populace support and take to be true. Take for example the instance where the Max claims that if he hadn't presented himself and his arguments, people would have never learned much regarding fallacies. It generally draws conclusions based on the populum. For instance, "all patriotic Americans ought to support the President's actions. This goes without necessarily indicating why the action should be supported.

Ad Misericodiam

The fallacy "Ad Misericodiam" is normally employed to "appeal to pity". In the context of the story, the narrator tells Polly that if she does not love him she will "wander in the face of the world that he'll live a life of anguish as a "shambling hallow-eyed hulk" who will refuse to take his meals (Shulman 47-49). In another context, authors present ad Misericordiam as an appeal to the reader's taste, intelligence, or wish to be rich, famous or the need is more intelligent. While Max Shulman emphasizes on the (material benefits that Polly stands to gain from the relationship), she only adores Petey's raccoon coat and nothing else, hence the narrator's appeal to her fears or pit simply fails (Fowler, Jane and Murray 197-198)

Post Hoc

The fallacy confuses characteristic coincidental relations with the causal factors or assumptions. The narrator concludes that because events occur in a subsequent manner, that is one after another, the prior event must be the causal factor of the latter. Example: "Let's not take Bill on our picnic. Every time we take him out with us, it rains." (Shulman 47)

More often than not, arguments attribute existing conditions to pre-existent ones, for instance, assuming that Polly failed to love Petey because of the false promises he made to her. In another example, the arguments of the Shulman depict that Polly is "as dumb as oxen" just because he is into fads and trends (Fowler, Jane and Murray 197-199).

Works Cited

Fowler, Henry Ramsey, Jane E. Aaron, and Murray McArthur. The little, brown handbook. Pearson/Longman, 2004.

Shulman, Max. "Love is a Fallacy." The Many Loves of Dobie Gillis (Garden City, NY: Garden City Press, 1953) 47 (1995).