Argumentum ad populum: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 18:47, 10 April 2007

Latest revision as of 04:01, 28 July 2025

(789 intermediate revisions by more than 100 users not shown)

Line 1:

{{Short description|Fallacy of claiming the majority is always correct}}

An '''argumentum ad populum''' ([[Latin]]: "appeal to the people"), in [[logic]], is a [[logical fallacy|fallacious argument]] that concludes a [[proposition]] to be true because many or all people believe it; it alleges that "''If many believe so, it is so.''" In [[ethics]] this argument is stated, "''if many find it acceptable, it is acceptable.''"

{{Hatnote|"Appeal to the people" redirects here. For the Japanese communist document, see [[Appeal to the People]].}}

{{Hatnote|"{{lang|la|ad populum}}" redirects here. For the Catholic liturgical term, see {{langlink|la|versus populum}}.}}

{{Use mdy dates|date=April 2020}}

{{title language|la}}

In [[argumentation theory]], an '''{{Lang|la|argumentum ad populum}}''' ([[Latin]] for 'appeal to the people')<ref name="Walton 1999">{{cite book|last=Walton|first=Douglas N.|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=RtUrOUGI50YC&q=%22ad+populum%22|title=Appeal to Popular Opinion|date=1999|publisher=The Pennsylvania State University Press|isbn=0-271-01818-6|pages=61–62|lccn=98031384|author-link=Douglas N. Walton}}</ref> is a [[fallacious argument]] that asserts a claim is true, or good or correct because many people think so.<ref>{{cite web |last1=Ayala |first1=Maite |title=Falacia ad populum: definición, características, ejemplos |url=https://www.lifeder.com/falacia-ad-populum/ |website=Lifeder |access-date=1 August 2021 |language=es |date=11 January 2021}}</ref>

== Alternative names ==

This type of argument is known by several names<ref>Austin Cline. [http://atheism.about.com/od/logicalfallacies/a/numbers.htm Argumentum ad Populum]</ref>, including '''appeal to belief''', '''appeal to the majority''', '''appeal to the people''', '''argument by consensus''', '''authority of the many''', '''bandwagon fallacy''', and '''tyranny of the majority''', and in [[Latin]] by the names ''argumentum ad populum'' ("appeal to the people"), '''''argumentum ad numerum''''' ("appeal to the number"), and '''''consensus gentium''''' ("agreement of the clans"). It is also the basis of a number of social phenomena, including [[communal reinforcement]] and the [[bandwagon effect]], and of the [[Chinese language|Chinese]] proverb "[[three men make a tiger]]".

Other names for the fallacy include:

{{Columns-list|* ''appeal to (common) belief''{{r|Conway & Munson|Epstein}}

* ''appeal to popularity''{{sfnp|Walton|1999|p=123}}{{r|Govier}}

* ''appeal to the majority''{{r|Tittle}}

* ''appeal to the masses''{{sfnp|Walton|1999|pp=81, 85}}

* ''argument from consensus''{{r|Engel}}

* ''authority of the many''{{r|Engel|Hinderer}}

* ''bandwagon fallacy''{{r|Govier|McCraw}}

* ''common belief fallacy''{{r|Conway & Munson|Epstein}}

* ''democratic fallacy''{{r|Van Vleet}}

* ''mob appeal''{{Citation needed|date=January 2023}}

* ''truth by association''{{sfnp|Walton|1999|p=197}}

* {{lang|la|consensus gentium}} (Latin for 'agreement of the people'){{r|McCraw}}}}

==Examples Description ==

''{{Lang|la|Argumentum ad populum}}'' is a type of [[informal fallacy]],{{r|Walton 1999|Hansen}} specifically a [[fallacy of relevance]],<ref name="Rescher">{{cite encyclopedia |last1=Rescher |first1=Nicholas |last2=Schagrin |first2=Morton L. |title=Fallacy |url=https://www.britannica.com/topic/fallacy |access-date=December 21, 2019 |date= |encyclopedia=[[Encyclopædia Britannica]]}}</ref><ref name="Hitchcock">{{cite book |last=Hitchcock |first=David |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=KnyhDgAAQBAJ&q=%22ad+populum%22 |title=On Reasoning and Argument: Essays in Informal Logic and on Critical Thinking |date=2017 |publisher=Springer |isbn=978-3-319-53561-6 |page=406 |lccn=2017930649}}</ref> and is similar to an [[argument from authority]] (''argumentum ad verecundiam'').<ref name="Hansen">{{cite encyclopedia |last=Hansen |first=Hans |title=Fallacies |url=https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/fallacies/ |publisher=Stanford University |date=May 29, 2015 |encyclopedia=[[Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy]]}}</ref><ref name="Epstein">{{cite book |last1=Epstein |first1=Richard L. |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=NwqnDwAAQBAJ&q=%22appeal+to+common+belief%22 |title=Critical Thinking |last2=Rooney |first2=Michael |date=2017 |publisher=Advanced Reasoning Forum |isbn=978-1-938421-32-7 |edition=5th |___location=Socorro, N.M. |page=76 |lccn=2017471425}}</ref><ref name="Engel">{{cite book |last=Engel |first=S. Morris |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=cvfDAgAAQBAJ&q=%22argument+by+consensus%22 |title=Fallacies and Pitfalls of Language: The Language Trap |date=1994 |publisher=Dover Publications |isbn=0-486-28274-0 |___location=New York |pages=145–6 |lccn=94019770 |author-link=S. Morris Engel}}</ref> It uses an appeal to the beliefs, tastes, or values of a group of people,<ref name="Van Vleet">{{cite book |last=Van Vleet |first=Jacob E. |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=dnLKeGXQnJgC&q=%22ad+populum%22 |title=Informal Logical Fallacies: A Brief Guide |date=2011 |publisher=University Press of America |isbn=978-0-7618-5432-6 |page=20 |lccn=2016448028}}</ref> stating that because a certain opinion or attitude is held by a majority, or even everyone, it is therefore correct.{{r|Van Vleet}}<ref>{{cite book |last=Woods |first=John |editor1-last=Gabbay |editor1-first=D.M. |editor2-last=Pelletier |editor2-first=F.J. |editor3-last=Woods |editor3-first=J. |title=Logic: A History of its Central Concepts |date=2012 |publisher=North-Holland |isbn=978-0-08-093170-8 |page=561 |chapter-url=https://books.google.com/books?id=9mwtRDXVM2wC&q=%22ad+populum%22 |chapter=A History of the Fallacies in Western Logic |series=Handbook of the History of Logic}}</ref>

This fallacy is sometimes committed while trying to convince a person that a widely popular theory is true.

*Since there is [[scientific consensus]] on theory A, then theory A must be true.

*Since 88% of the people polled believed in UFOs, they must exist.

*Since citizens have to pay taxes and are ruled by governments, the state must be a judicial reasoned and rightful institution.

*Since most of the world believes in God, he must exist.

Appeals to popularity are common in commercial advertising that portrays products as desirable because they are used by many people{{r|Engel}} or associated with popular sentiments<ref name="Walton 1989">{{cite book |last=Walton |first=Douglas N. |title=Informal Logic: A Handbook for Critical Argumentation |date=1989 |publisher=Cambridge University Press |isbn=0-521-37032-9 |page=84 |chapter=Appeals to emotion |lccn=88030762 |chapter-url=https://books.google.com/books?id=kswimguc5uYC&q=%22ad-populum%22}}</ref> instead of communicating the merits of the products themselves.

It is sometimes committed when trying to convince a person that widely unpopular theories are false.

*It's silly for you to claim that [[Adolf Hitler|Hitler]] would not have attacked the United States if they hadn't entered World War II. Everyone knows that he planned to conquer the world.

The [[Inverse (logic)|inverse]] argument, that something that is unpopular must be flawed, is also a form of this fallacy.<ref name="Govier">{{cite book |last=Govier |first=Trudy |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=IUxXbUvDiswC&q=%22appeal+to+popularity%22 |title=A Practical Study of Argument |date=2009 |publisher=Cengage Learning |isbn=978-0-495-60340-5 |edition=7th |page=162 |author-link=Trudy Govier}}</ref>

The fallacy is commonly found in arguments over [[ethics]]:

*Most Americans hold that the [[Vietnam War]] was morally wrong. Therefore, the Vietnam War was morally wrong.

The fallacy is similar in structure to certain other fallacies that involve a confusion between the "justification" of a belief and its "widespread acceptance" by a given group of people. When an argument uses the appeal to the beliefs of a group of experts, it takes on the form of an appeal to authority; if the appeal relates to the beliefs of a group of respected elders or the members of one's community over a long time, then it takes on the form of an [[appeal to tradition]]. <!--{{Citation needed span|date=December 2019|It is also the basis of a number of social phenomena, including [[communal reinforcement]] and the [[bandwagon effect]]. The Chinese [[proverb]] "[[three men make a tiger]]" concerns the same idea.}}-->

The fallacy is also commonly found in [[marketing]]:

*Brand X vacuum cleaners are the leading brand in America. You should buy Brand X vacuum cleaners.

=== Scholarship ===

Other examples:

The philosopher [[Irving Copi]] defined ''{{Lang|la|argumentum ad populum}}'' differently from an appeal to popular opinion itself,<ref name="Freeman">{{cite book |last=Freeman |first=James B. |editor1-last=Hansen |editor1-first=Hans V. |editor2-last=Pinto |editor2-first=Robert C. |title=Fallacies: Classical and Contemporary Readings |date=1995 |publisher=The Pennsylvania State University Press |isbn=0-271-01416-4 |page=266 |chapter-url=https://books.google.com/books?id=ftCx1ViH4B0C&q=%22ad+populum%22+copi |chapter=The Appeal to Popularity and Presumption by Common Knowledge}}</ref> as an attempt to rouse the "emotions and enthusiasms of the multitude".{{r|Freeman}}<ref>{{cite book|last=Walton|first=Douglas N.|title=The Place of Emotion in Argument|date=1992|publisher=The Pennsylvania State University Press|isbn=0-271-00833-4|pages=66–7|chapter=Argumentum Ad Populum|lccn=91030515|author-link=Douglas N. Walton|chapter-url=https://books.google.com/books?id=eZ6Tmr2PaHcC&pg=PA65}}</ref>

* ''Fifty million Elvis fans can't be wrong.''

* ''Christianity is believed in by the greatest amount of people in the world, so it must be true.''

* ''"Every society but ours believed in magic; why should we think otherwise?" "Every society but ours thought the sun revolved about the Earth, rather than the other way round. Would you decide the matter by majority vote?"'' - [[Isaac Asimov]].

*''In a court of law, the jury vote by majority, therefore they will always make the correct decision''

[[Douglas N. Walton]] argues that appeals to popular opinion can be logically valid in some cases, such as in political dialogue within a [[democracy]].{{sfnp|Walton|1992|p=65}}

==Explanation==

The argumentum ad populum is a [[red herring (fallacy)|red herring]] and [[genetic fallacy]]. It is logically fallacious because the mere fact that a belief is widely held is not necessarily a guarantee that the belief is correct; if the belief of any individual can be wrong, then the belief held by multiple persons can also be wrong.

== Reversals ==

This fallacy is similar in structure to certain other fallacies that involve a confusion between the ''justification'' of a belief and its ''widespread acceptance'' by a given group of people. When an argument uses the appeal to the beliefs of a group of supposed experts, it takes on the form of an [[appeal to authority]]; if the appeal is to the beliefs of a group of respected elders or the members of one's community over a long period of time, then it takes on the form of an [[appeal to tradition]].

In some circumstances, a person may argue that the fact that Y people believe X to be true implies that X is ''false''. This line of thought is closely related to the [[appeal to spite]] fallacy given that it invokes a person's contempt for the general populace or something about the general populace to persuade them that most are wrong about X. This ''ad populum'' reversal commits the same logical flaw as the original fallacy given that the idea "X is true" is inherently separate from the idea that "Y people believe X": "Y people believe in X as true, purely because Y people believe in it, and not because of any further considerations. Therefore X must be false." While Y people can believe X to be true for fallacious reasons, X might still be true. Their motivations for believing X do not affect whether X is true or false.

Y = most people, a given quantity of people, people of a particular demographic.

One who commits this fallacy may assume that individuals commonly analyze and edit their beliefs and behaviors. This is often not the case (see [[Conformity (psychology)|conformity]]).

X = a statement that can be true or false.

===Evidence===

* One could claim that smoking is a healthy pastime, since millions of people do it. However, knowing the dangers of smoking, we instead say that smoking ''is not'' a healthy pastime ''despite'' the fact that millions do it.

* One could claim that 13 is an "''unlucky''" number, since many people ([[triskaidekaphobia|triskaidekaphobes]]) believe it to be. However, the association of any number with the concept of [[luck]] is a [[superstition]].

* One could claim [[Brad Pitt]] is the best-looking man in the world, because he is regularly voted such, although the sample he is part of (celebrities) is insufficient.

*Environmentalists often claim that global warming must be happening, because most scientists believe it is happening. However, science works by evidence, not popular vote. It is more appropriate to point to the balance of evidence itself being strongly in favour of global warming, than to point to the number of scientists for or against the hypothesis.

Examples:

==Exceptions==

*"Are you going to be a [[conformity|mindless conformist drone]] drinking milk and water like everyone else, or will you wake up and drink my product?"

Appeal to belief is only valid when the question is whether the belief exists.

*"Everyone likes [[The Beatles]] and that probably means that they didn't have nearly as much talent as &lt;Y band&gt;, which didn't [[selling out|sell out]]."{{efn|These ideas are paraphrased from [http://www.goodreads.ca/rebelsell/ this presentation by authors] [[The Rebel Sell|Andrew Potter and Joseph Heath]] in which they state:

Appeal to popularity is therefore only valid when the questions are whether the belief is widespread and to what degree.

*"For example, everybody would love to listen to fabulous underground bands that nobody has ever heard of before, but not all of us can do this. Once too many people find out about this great band, then they are no longer underground. And so we say that it's sold out or 'mainstream' or even 'co-opted by the system'. What has really happened is simply that too many people have started buying their albums so that listening to them no longer serves as a source of distinction. The real rebels therefore have to go off and find some new band to listen to that nobody else knows about in order to preserve this distinction and their sense of superiority over others."}}

*"The [[German people]] today consists of the [[Auschwitz]] [[generation]], with every person in power being guilty in some way. How on earth can we buy the generally held propaganda that the [[Soviet Union]] is imperialistic and totalitarian? Clearly, it must not be."{{efn|These ideas are paraphrased from the [http://www.trutv.com/library/crime/terrorists_spies/terrorists/meinhof/5.html 'Baader Meinhof Gang'] article at the [http://www.trutv.com/library/crime/ True Crime Library], which states:

*"[[Gudrun Ensslin]] may have been wrong about many or most things, she was not speaking foolishly when she spoke of the middle-aged folk of her era as "the Auschwitz generation". Not all of them had been Nazis, of course, but a great many had supported Hitler. Many had been in the Hitler Youth and served in the armed forces, fighting Nazi wars of conquest. A minority had ineffectively resisted Nazism but, as a whole, it was a generation coping with an extraordinary burden of guilt and shame{{nbsp}}... many of the people who joined what would come to be known as the Baader-Meinhof Gang were motivated by an unconscious desire to prove to themselves that they would have risked their lives to defeat Nazism{{nbsp}}... West Germans well knew. Many of them had relatives in East Germany and were well aware that life under communism was regimented and puritanical at best and often monstrously oppressive."}}

*"Everyone loves &lt;A actor&gt;. &lt;A actor&gt; must be nowhere near as talented as the devoted and serious [[method actor]]s that aren't so popular like &lt;B actor&gt;."

In general, the reversal usually goes: "Most people believe A and B are both true. B is false. Thus, A is false." The similar fallacy of [[chronological snobbery]] is not to be confused with the ''ad populum'' reversal. Chronological snobbery is the claim that if belief in both X and Y was popularly held in the past and if Y was recently proved to be untrue then X must also be untrue. That line of argument is based on a belief in historical progress and not—like the ''ad populum'' reversal is—on whether or not X and/or Y is currently popular.

===Democracy===

The "correctness" of electoral processes lies in the prior acceptance by the electorate that the outcome of an election shall be enacted no matter what it is.

== Valid uses ==

* ''"Most of the voting members at the last [[Rotary Club]] meeting thought that the Club should hold a fund-raiser in October. Therefore, the Club should hold a fund-raiser in October."''

Appeals to public opinion are valid in situations where consensus is the determining factor for the validity of a statement, such as linguistic usage and definitions of words.

=== Language ===

[[Democracy]] by [[plural voting]] is based on appeal to popularity. As a means of determining the truth of beliefs, it is fallacious. Democracy does not obviate this; it merely makes the fallacy irrelevant by defining law as subjective rather than objective<small>^*</small>. Nonetheless, acceptance of policies and candidates have been shown to be well-correlated with their effectiveness (cf. [[Approval voting]]). As a system of political decisionmaking, electoral systems compare favorably against ''fiat'' systems such as [[feudalism]] and pseudo-democracies such as [[one-party state|one-party rule]].

[[Linguistic descriptivist]]s argue that correct grammar, spelling, and expressions are defined by the language's speakers, especially in languages which do not have a central governing body. According to this viewpoint, if an incorrect expression is commonly used, it becomes correct. In contrast, [[linguistic prescriptivist]]s believe that incorrect expressions are incorrect regardless of how many people use them. <ref>{{cite web|url=https://knowadays.com/blog/prescriptivism-vs-descriptivism/|date=April 15, 2021 |title=Editing Tips: Prescriptivism vs. Descriptivism }}</ref>

(Though the astute will note that this is a circular argument: ''Democracy is good because people living in a democracy say so.'')

=== Mathematics ===

Argumentum ad populum explains how some democracies have fallen victim to this principle. (See [[Propaganda]] and [[Nazi Germany]].)

[[Special functions]] are [[function (mathematics)|mathematical function]]s that have well-established names and mathematical notations due to their significance in mathematics and other scientific fields.

There is no formal definition of what makes a function a special function; instead, the term ''special function'' is defined by consensus. Functions generally considered to be special functions include [[logarithm]]s, [[trigonometric functions]], and the [[Bessel functions]].

=== Social convention ===

== See also ==

Matters of social convention, such as [[etiquette]] or polite manners, depend upon the wide acceptance of the convention. As such, ''argumentum ad populum'' is not fallacious when referring to the popular belief about what is polite or proper:

{{columns-list|colwidth=20em|

* ''[[50,000,000 Elvis Fans Can't Be Wrong: Elvis' Gold Records, Volume 2]]''

* ''[[A Hundred Authors Against Einstein]]''

* ''[[Ad hominem]]''

* ''[[Reductio ad Hitlerum]]''

* [[Cognitive dissonance]]

* [[Consensus theory of truth]]

* [[Fundamental attribution bias]]

* [[Groupthink]]

* [[Hurting the feelings of the Chinese people]]

* [[Kayfabe]]

* [[List of fallacies]]

* [[Scientific consensus]]

* [[Social proof]]

* [[Wisdom of the crowd]]

}}

== Notes ==

* ''"Most people in Russia think that it is polite for men to kiss each other in greeting. Therefore, it is polite for men to kiss each other in greeting in Russia."''

{{Notelist}}

== References ==

Social conventions can change, however, sometimes very quickly. Thus, the fact that everyone in Russia this year thinks that it is polite to kiss can't be used as evidence that everyone always believed that, or that they ''should'' always believe it.

{{Reflist|30em|refs=

<ref name="Conway & Munson">{{cite book |last1=Conway |first1=David |last2=Munson |first2=Ronald |title=The Elements of Reasoning |date=1997 |publisher=Wadsworth Publishing Company |isbn=0-534-51672-6 |pages=127–128 |edition=2nd |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=7TwNAQAAMAAJ&q=%22appeal+to+belief%22 |language=en}}</ref>

The philosophical question of [[moral relativism]] asks whether such arguments apply to statements of morals.

<ref name="Hinderer">{{cite book |last=Hinderer |first=Drew |title=Building Arguments |date=2005 |publisher=Wipf and Stock Publishers |___location=Eugene, Ore. |isbn=978-1-59752-076-8 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=SUpLAwAAQBAJ&q=%22authority+of+the+many%22}}</ref>

===Safety===

Whether to follow a tenet decided by popularity rather than logical design may be a matter of safety or convenience:

<ref name="McCraw">{{cite book |last=McCraw |first=Benjamin W. |editor1-last=Arp |editor1-first=Robert |editor2-last=Barbone |editor2-first=Steven |editor3-last=Bruce |editor3-first=Michael |title=Bad Arguments: 100 of the Most Important Fallacies in Western Philosophy |date=2018 |publisher=John Wiley & Sons |isbn=978-1-119-16790-7 |pages=112–114 |chapter-url=https://books.google.com/books?id=j_lmDwAAQBAJ&pg=PA112 |chapter=Appeal to the People}}</ref>

* ''"Nearly all Americans think that you should drive on the right side of the road. Therefore, you should drive on the right side of the road in the United States."''

<ref name="Tittle">{{cite book |last=Tittle |first=Peg |title=Critical Thinking: An Appeal to Reason |date=2011 |publisher=Routledge |isbn=978-0-203-84161-7 |page=136 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=3DdZBwAAQBAJ&q=%22appeal+to+the+majority%22 }}</ref>

In this case, the choice of which side to drive on is basically arbitrary. However, to avoid head-on collisions, everyone on the road must agree on it. In many cases, what is safe to do depends on what others expect one will do, and thus on the "popularity" of that choice.

}}

==References==

{{reflist}}

==See alsoFurther reading ==

* {{cite journal|last=Walton|first=Douglas N.|author-link=Douglas N. Walton|title=Why Is the 'ad Populum' a Fallacy?|url=https://www.dougwalton.ca/papers%20in%20pdf/80populum.pdf|url-status=live|journal=[[Philosophy & Rhetoric]]|year=1980|volume=13|issue=4|pages=264–278|jstor=40237163|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160329024238/https://www.dougwalton.ca/papers%20in%20pdf/80populum.pdf|archive-date=March 29, 2016|issn=0031-8213}}

{{col-begin}}

{{col-break}}

* [[Appeal to authority]]

* [[Bandwagon effect]]

* [[Cognitive dissonance]]

* [[Communal reinforcement]]

* [[Consensus reality]]

* [[Conventional wisdom]]

{{col-break}}

* [[Fundamental attribution bias]]

* [[Groupthink]]

* [[Reductio ad Hitlerum]]

* ''[[The Wisdom of Crowds]]''

* [[Three men make a tiger]]

* [[Two wrongs make a right (fallacy)|Two wrongs make a right]]

== External links ==

{{col-end}}

* [https://www.thoughtco.com/argumentum-ad-populum-250340 "Argumentum ad Populum (Appeal to Numbers)"], ''ThoughtCo''.

* [https://owl.excelsior.edu/argument-and-critical-thinking/logical-fallacies/logical-fallacies-bandwagon/ "Bandwagon Fallacy"], Excelsior College Online Writing Lab

* [https://philosophy.lander.edu/logic/popular.html "Philosophy 103: Introduction to Logic: Argumentum Ad Populum"], Lander University

{{Fallacies}}

{{Red_Herring_Fallacy}}

{{Propaganda}}

{{Authority control}}

[[Category:PropagandaGenetic fallacies]]

[[Category:Latin logical phrases]]

[[Category:SocialMajority–minority constructionismrelations]]

[[Category:LogicalPropaganda fallaciestechniques]]

[[de:Consensus gentium]]

[[es:Argumentum ad populum]]

[[fr:Argumentum ad populum]]

[[he:אד פופולום]]

[[lt:Apeliavimas į mases]]

[[hu:Argumentum ad populum]]

[[nl:Ad populum]]

[[pt:Argumentum ad populum]]

[[ru:Argumentum ad populum]]

[[sv:Argumentum ad populum]]

[[tr:Argumentum ad populum]]

[[uk:Argumentum ad Populum]]

[[zh:訴諸群眾]]