The premises must be true for an argument to be SOUND. But an argument can be VALID even if all of its premises are false. “All parakeets are physicists, All physicists are tap dancers; therefore All parakeets are tap dancers” is a valid argument, because if both premises were true, the conclusion would have to be true. Logic will never tell you whether this argument is sound. If you have any doubts about the truth-value of the conclusion, you can resolve them only by doing some research on parakeets, physicists and/or tap dancers.
I agree that Penguin’s argument is not sound, but that is because a couple of his premises are false. That is what makes his argument a strawman. The strawman (usually called a strawperson these days) is called an informal fallacy, which means that although there is nothing structurally wrong with it, it still doesn’t provide real support for its alleged conclusion. Here is my translation of his argument into strict logical form. No one but a logic nerd would write an argument this way. But when you do write it this way, you can peek under the hood and see where the parts don’t connect properly.
The first step is a Modus Ponens.
If W than A
W therefore A
If Society is founded on white supremacy, then all Action undertaken by white people within that society reinforces the supremacy of white people over BIPOC.
Society is founded on white supremacy
Therefore all Action undertaken by white people within that society reinforces the supremacy of white people over BIPOC.
We can then translate the conclusion into Aristotelian form, and then use it in the following syllogism.
All W is S
A is W
Therefore A is S.
All action undertaken by White people is action that reinforces White supremacy.
Anti-racism is an action undertaken by white people.
Therefore Anti-Racism is an action that reinforces White Supremacy.
(The phrase “If BIPOC say so” is tacked on by Penguin without any support, although Penguin does give arguments for it elsewhere.) The final stage of Penguin’s argument is an implied reductio ad absurdum, because he claims the conclusion contradicts itself.
Each of these component arguments is logically valid, but the whole argument is a straw person, because of one false premise: No one actually believes that all action undertaken by White people reinforces White supremacy. There are a lot of writers on Medium who agree with Marley K.’s claim that All White People are Racists https://medium.com/age-of-awareness/yes-all-white-people-are-racist-eefa97cc5605 But that does not necessarily imply that every action taken by a white person reinforces white supremacy. Marley herself denies this in her essay. In fact, she specifically says that there are actions that racist people can take to help dismantle White Supremacy, and all those actions start with admitting that you are racist.
"You are racist love, but it’s okay to admit it. I’m ready for you to admit it so that we can move on to bigger things. You denying the obvious stalls the long road to healing . . . .You can help with tearing down the racist systems and structures that support you and kill me and my sons based on flawed science crafted by flawed White and European people. White people admitting they are racist is necessary for those individuals desiring to do something right now."
It may seem on first reading that this next quote contradicts her claim that all White People are Racists.
"Thankfully, I’ve found new good White people who get the racism thing. They are good people, people that I can trust, and I don’t have to guess what side of the fence they are on."
But there is no contradiction here because she is not saying that these good White people are not racists. She is saying that they “Get the racism thing” i.e. that they know they are racist and are working to fight racism in themselves and others.
I’m somewhat skeptical of the belief that cleaning racism out of our souls is the first step towards social justice. I think it is better strategy to do concrete external actions like reform the police, put more POCs in position of power, provide more economic and educational opportunities etc. and let peoples minds change as a result of these external changes. I also think that if external changes like these were successful, most black people wouldn’t worry that much if a few cranky bigots continued to mutter racists epithets under their breath. But positions like Marley’s are not self-contradictory, as Penguin claims, and arguments against them must be based on facts and research, not deductive logic.
I taught Logic and Critical Thinking for 20 years, and can’t help but notice that most people who speak highly of logic don’t really understand how it works or how to use it. I therefore decided to put up some of the essays I wrote for my Critical Thinking classes about applying logic to the real world. Here’s the first one, more to come soon.
