Indeed a very good approach to the subject.As I was reading this catalogue of examples, the whole thing became much simpler to understand and interpret. It comes down to a basic forensic question: Cui bono? Who benfits from moral equivalence? Martin Amis calls it "The fetishization of balance". And I consider it one of the rhetorical fallacies, to be treated with the same severity we treat the red herring and the ad hom.
Thanks for drawing it to our attention, Bob. An excellent article
Post a Comment