THANK YOU FOR SMOKING (DETECTING FALLACIES)
To win over an opponent's eye, Nick Naylor, a lobbyist who promotes tobacco for a living, convinced himself that he possesses such great capacity to manipulate, outsmart and outwit other individuals. This, however, does not require a lot of wisdom --- just good marketing.
The truth is, Naylor just uses faulty arguments which contain fallacies in order for him to succeed. In a scene, he told his son Joey "... That's the beauty of argument. If you argue correctly, you are never wrong". This portrays a frame of Nick’s character, thus, explains the reason as to why he does not lose arguments in different conversations. This is because he reframes the argument until he finds a way to prevail.
Some of the many obvious fallacious arguments which Naylor presented are as follow: On the first part of the movie, Nick Naylor used appeal to ignorance to suggest that because research had not yet proven that cigarettes lead to lung cancer, therefore, they must not cause lung cancer.
Another one is the scene wherein his son's stepfather confronted him with the lines, “I hope you’re providing Joey with a smoke-free environment,” Naylor defensively replied, “I’m his father, you’re the guy fucking his mother,”. This is an obvious low blow. He committed the argument against the person - Abusive fallacy.
Naylor also had an early concept of pitching an advertisement that features actors in Hollywood to smoke. For him, this would make smoking more popular for others having seen that celebrities are doing it. This depicts a fallacy of appeal to the people. However, these celebrities are not experts on health, thus, making them false authorities. This shows an appeal to unqualified authority fallacy.
False dichotomy was also observed when he bribed the 'Marlboro Man’ that he only has two options, either he take the money and shut his mouth or not take the money at all.
A conversation between him and his son in the midst of touring him around California displays a fallacy as well, where he reframes the argument by diverting the topic, "Well I need more than chocolate, and for that matter, I need more than vanilla. I believe that we need freedom". This reveals the fallacy of red herring.
During the senatorial committee meeting, The against the Person - tuquoque fallacy was used by Naylor when he threw "you too" arguments to the senator. The red herring fallacy was again used when he emphasized the negative effects of Vermont cheddar cheese (which is also in need of warning signs as he claimed) on raising cholesterol levels.
Although Naylor used the most fallacious arguments in the movie, it is likewise noticeable that the other characters accustomed such fallacies too. The woman reporter showed red herring fallacy when Nick fell from her trap of knowing his secrets and telling things he should not by seducing him. This almost ruined his job and reputation. Joey, on the other hand, made use of appeal to pity fallacy when he tried to ask permission to allow him to join in his father's California trip. Surprisingly, he had convinced his mother.
Generally, Thank You For Smoking is a movie of triumph. Knowing that I have to write a paper with regards to it, I have been a keen observant. I concluded that fallacies do not really strengthen an argument. They might make it sound better to an inattentive listener, yet they will always weaken the logic behind the argument --- And this is the real beauty of an argument.
(This essay serves as my Quiz No. 3 in Critical Thinking under Ms. Hazel Biana, and not in any way responsible for any other purposes)