Snopes for Public Reasoning: LogicCheck.net

Article example – analysis of “zingers” from a presidential primary debate.

I recently met author and educational consultant Jonathan Haber at the American Philosophical Association’s annual Eastern Division meeting. Having just presented on how ethics bowl enthusiasts have leveraged the web (team collaboration, volunteer registration, awesome blogs), Haber asked me and the other panelists about ways to encourage journalists to improve the quality of their inferences.

As he explained, media-types are used to fact checking. But many feel unqualified, and possibly a little defensive, about logic checking. This is why he set up LogicCheck.net, a website devoted to helping journalists improve the quality of their reasoning. The tagline: Check the Facts. Understand the Argument. Know the Truth.

I suggested highlighting examples of well-reasoned journalism and possibly adding a gentle rating system. The examples could serve as models. And the ratings could encourage journalists to review their inferences before clicking “publish.”

Well, I was pleased to receive a message from Haber this week that he had featured a well-argued editorial by Houston Chronicle staff and awarded it “five dumbbells” as an especially strong argument.

Titled, “Purge of Trump, Parler Show Big Tech Firms Have Too Much Power,” the Chronicle’s argument is indeed evenhanded and reasonable. As Haber points out, the authors don’t marginalize the legitimate values in tension: freedom of expression vs. safety, stability and truth. Their proposed solution (putting more responsibility on platforms, authors and communities to self-monitor, with some light government oversight) follows well enough rom the premises. And it’s both measured and respectfully offered.

Written in the mature, civil style of philosophers at their best, it’s indeed a fine example of a quality argument. Kudos to the Houston Chronicle for their responsible journalism, and kudos to Haber and LogicCheck.net for featuring it. Check out the article and analysis for yourself here.

While you’re there, peruse the site, see what you might learn under Argumentation, More -> Fallacies or Logic-Checker.

Now, who’s the former ethics bowler writing for the Chronicle?

Leave a Reply