Riots in France
The media have been all over this one, but what is disappointing is the lack of critical thinking on the part of citizens. Note that I did not call this surprising.
A blog I came upon randomly (I would provide a link but do not wish to increase traffic to that tripe) contained a comment on the "Muslim wilding" in France. After a brief email exchange with the blogger, I found myself mentioned in an update that includes the claim that 97% of the rioters are Muslims. Wow! And here I was wondering just what percentage of the rioters were Islamic, when all I needed to do was take a census. Never mind that no one in France has reported any concrete figures; that would be using fact.
Let us continue. The blogger noted that two churches had been burned, which may well be true enough. He went on to claim, however, that no synagogues or mosques had suffered. Oops. It turns out that at least one mosque was fire-bombed on 11 November. Then again, including information such as that would be using fact.
Never mind that the riots began in an area plagued by greater than 30% unemployment and that unemployment, not Muslim population, has proven a better indicator of which areas would get engulfed in the riots. It's much easier to blame it on religion. Might some be out in the streets because of religious fervor? Sure. Does this blogger—does anyone, for that matter—yet have the facts to make that determination? No.
My central problem with the blogger was the presumption of causation. I doubt that someone teaching seventh grade needs, as part of his job description, any skill in avoiding non sequiturs, but I had hoped that perhaps such a person might have learned it along the way.
C'est la vie!
A blog I came upon randomly (I would provide a link but do not wish to increase traffic to that tripe) contained a comment on the "Muslim wilding" in France. After a brief email exchange with the blogger, I found myself mentioned in an update that includes the claim that 97% of the rioters are Muslims. Wow! And here I was wondering just what percentage of the rioters were Islamic, when all I needed to do was take a census. Never mind that no one in France has reported any concrete figures; that would be using fact.
Let us continue. The blogger noted that two churches had been burned, which may well be true enough. He went on to claim, however, that no synagogues or mosques had suffered. Oops. It turns out that at least one mosque was fire-bombed on 11 November. Then again, including information such as that would be using fact.
Never mind that the riots began in an area plagued by greater than 30% unemployment and that unemployment, not Muslim population, has proven a better indicator of which areas would get engulfed in the riots. It's much easier to blame it on religion. Might some be out in the streets because of religious fervor? Sure. Does this blogger—does anyone, for that matter—yet have the facts to make that determination? No.
My central problem with the blogger was the presumption of causation. I doubt that someone teaching seventh grade needs, as part of his job description, any skill in avoiding non sequiturs, but I had hoped that perhaps such a person might have learned it along the way.
C'est la vie!
Ignited by Andrew Purvis at 2:03 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home