All heroes deserve freedom.
Edward Snowden is a hero.
Therefore Edward Snowden deserves freedom.
When looked at
deductively, the following syllogism is acceptable and correct because we are
forced to accept the premise. However, when looked at inductively, the argument
and conclusion change dramatically. First of all, the phrase “all heroes
deserve freedom” is purely an opinion hidden in a premise, which then leads to
a faulty conclusion. Does everyone think that heroes deserve freedom? If not
then who gets to decide if they do or do not deserve freedom? Should there be
some kind of rubric of what it takes to be a hero? If so who gets to create
this? Also, what and who are heroes? The word “hero” is formally defined as “a
person, typically a man, who is admired or idealized for courage, outstanding
achievements, or noble qualities.” Was leaking many classified documents noble
or an achievement? This also depends on your personal opinion on what is noble
or an achievement. To me, when someone mentions a hero, my mind automatically
refers to superman or wonder woman. However, to someone else, when asked to
think of a hero, they might automatically think of their father or a
firefighter. This could then rase the question of whether or not the way you are
raised has any affect on the way you see this syllogism. Also, what is freedom?
Freedom from what? Who gets to decide what that freedom means? And if freedom is
defined as “the power to act, speak, or think as one wants without hindrance or
restraint,” then aren’t we all not free in some way? Should only heroes be
free? The second phrase then states, “Edward Snowden is a hero.” Edward Snowden
was an employee of the CIA before he disclosed thousands of classified
documents to several media outlets. To those who got this disclosed
information, sure he’s a hero, but is he a hero to the CIA or the American
government? No, probably not. As a result of this he was even sent to an asylum
for one year when he was in Russia. He was also considered a fugitive by
American authorities who in June 2013 charged him with espionage and theft of
government property. If his actions had these repercussions, then there must be
people who do not agree that he is a hero. Therefore, to some, Edward Snowden
does not deserve freedom. This syllogism then depends greatly on your personal
opinion of who Edward Snowden is and what he did.
I really liked your response as it takes a look at the linguistic use of the words in the syllogism and challenges whether or not we should be compelled to accept the conclusion. As I am also writing on this topic of Snowden and heroes, I agree that the first two premises are highly opinionated; not everyone has a hero, not everyone believes that all heroes deserve freedom and not everyone believes that Snowden is a hero. It is good that you noted as well the linguistic connotations of the word "hero". I also think of superheroes from comic books like Superman or Spiderman and more often than not, the gender that pops up in my head is that of a male. But, and as you mentioned, it is important to note that not all people have this culture of fantastical super heroes that they think of when that word is used. Overall I think you did a good job in dissecting the syllogism however maybe you could have talked more about you conclusions about if he is a hero or not in your opinion.
ReplyDeleteAs I also wrote a post about Eric Snowden, i can say that i completely agree with your ideas. I have looked over the syllogism and seen it the same way you saw it. One thing that i think is a huge point that you almost mentioned while talking about the consideration of Snowden as a hero is what it takes for him to be a hero. Since the term "hero" is basically an opinion, and, as you stated, there is no rubric for judging the 'heroicness' of a person, how can we really say whether or not Snowden is a hero or not. Since hero isn't fact nor opinion, it would take everyone to agree that Snowden is a hero for him to become one. So therefore it only takes one person that does not think Snowden as a hero to take away that title. Obviously, there is more than one person who does not believe that Eric Snowden was and or is a hero.
ReplyDeleteI also agree that the premise of the syllogism is also faulty, given that the two aspects of which the premise relies on are both opinion based.
Good, Melanie. While I would like you to use ToK vocab a bit more, you've done a really careful job of taking apart the syllogism's pieces. Looking at your and Juan's posts, I wonder if there's something between heroism being individually defined and it having a single definition.
ReplyDelete