Critical Analysis of Article
In the article Why The Super Rich Are Inevitable by Alvin Chang, the author uses logical fallacies to inform the audience that the ratio of wealthy people is unavoidable. Logical fallacies can refer to invalid conclusions and deceptive thinking when errors in reasoning subvert the logic of an argument. Alvin Chang includes the following logical fallacies, begging the question, faulty causality, and hasty generalization to effectively support his claim. The author’s usage of these fallacies strengthen the claim regarding Why The Super Rich Are Inevitable.
Begging the Question or circular reasoning refers to an argument’s claim being assumed without evidence. Alvin Chang effectively introduces the fallacy “begging the question”, as he explains the correlation between our economic system and rich people. With this, Chang states “what if the economy-our economy-is designed to create a few super rich people (Chang 1)”? Framing a question in this way allows us to assume that our economy is pre-destined to create only a small amount of rich people.
Faulty Causality or Post can be defined when the author assumes that the chronology of events causes another event to happen. The author successfully incorporates his version of this fallacy when he explains policy-decisions and the yard sale model. He then writes that “they’ve said the government should just get out of the way to let the wealthy create jobs for the rest of us. This ideology has led to the massive tax cuts for the rich, from Ronald Reagan’s tax cut in 1981 to Donald Trump’s 2017 tax cut (Chang 1)”. Inciting that this ideology has led to the decision-making process during the terms of the listed president’s could be subjective. I say this because the president can’t make the decision to pass tax cuts and bills by himself. Our government’s check and balance system allows us to go through the house of representatives to get certain initiatives such as this one passed. Despite this, the author utilized this fallacy well in efforts to support his own claim.
Hasty Generalization is another fallacy that Alvin Chang effectively utilizes. Moreover, this fallacy occurs when someone makes an educational guess based on limited evidence. In Why The Super Rich Are Inevitable, Chang explains the correlation between the coin flip and millionaires. He states that “some of the wealthy players would inevitably argue that they deserve to be because they’re better at guessing the result of a coin flip”. This statement demonstrates an opinion more so than a fact. More specifically, there is no testimonials or credibility associated that would make readers believe this reasoning.
The following logical fallacies, begging the question, faulty causality, and hasty generalization were intentional when introducing rhetorical logic. I can said it has allowed me to critically think about the author’s true position regarding the claim.