On The Uses and Misuses of Logic

Or, Mr. Spock, Where The Heck Are You When We Need You?

Since yesterday, I have stumbled across two egregious misuses of logic I'd like to bring to your attention . . . in the hopes that we can all learn from, and avoid making, such faux pas in the future.

First, US Representative Nancy Johnson, R-Conn., is running an ad claiming her challenger, Democrat Chris Miller, is "wrong on security and wrong for America" because Miller wants to "waste valuable time" waiting for a warrant when terrorists are planning attacks on us over the phones. This actually is not so much a misuse of logic as it is a misrepresentation of fact--nevertheless, it is wrong, and deserves to be revealed as such. FISA (the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act) allows warrantless wiretaps for up to 72 hours. Anyone who cannot get a warrant in 3 days is either totally incompetent or unjustified. Johnson's claim that Miller is "weak on security" is out-and-out wrong. Indeed, Miller would be justified in running a reply ad that says Johnson is weak on maintaining the proper separation of powers our Constitution requires and thus Johnson has no business being in Congress.

Second, and perhaps a bit more frivolously, the Oregon Ducks upset the University of Oklahoma Sooners in college football last Saturday. The instant replay officials erroneously allowed an incorrect call on the field to stand. Oklahoma had a 5-point lead with about 1 minute to go; Oregon tried for an onside kick and was awarded possession of the ball even though an Oregon player, the first one to have touched the ball, did so in less than the 10-yard distance the rule on onside kicks requires. Under the rule, Oklahoma thus should have been awarded possession . . . and could have run out the clock and won the game. Instead, despite clear video evidence showing Oregon violated the rule, the officials gave Oregon the ball. Oregon thereupon scored a touchdown and won the game by 1 point.

Now several Oregon fans are saying that even though the officials obviously got the call wrong, the Sooners still could have stopped the Ducks from scoring, so the bad call is no big deal and it's not wrong for Oregon to claim victory.

At least this misuse of logic has the color of plausibility. Nonetheless, it is wrong. It fails to account for the normal human reaction of being in a stressful situation and getting disoriented for a critical few moments when confronted with something shocking. You cannot separate the bad call from the OU players' reaction to it and from what thereupon ensued.

Besides, it's really irrelevant. The bad call on the field should have been overturned, period. What happened after it was not overturned would not have happened but for the failure of the officials to correct their on-field mistake in the first place. It's a very good thing the PAC-10 suspended the officiating crew for a game and is looking into its policy of using only PAC-10 officials for PAC-10 home games. [I hope the PAC-10 has the guts to do what obviously needs to be done, which is to change that policy, in the interest of avoiding even the appearance of favoritism/impropriety.--Ed.]

Furthermore, Oregon fans should be ashamed of themselves for trying to justify the unjustifiable. I know I would be.