Over the weekend there have been many words written about AJ and his outburst at the Liberal Club.Most of these words have been as response to the vehemence of his speech but little has been written about a more insidious form of AJ’s behaviour – his use of poor logic to overwhelm his audience.
I have been following AJ and his convoluted logic for years,trying to unravel the sense that he uses it, the background to it and the wonder that so few have seen through the manipulation of logical space that he consciously uses and,if confronted, would deny,
Condensing the system AJ uses we can discuss it purely as a transformation of simple logic by hijacking a process that distorts the process of thought into an incredibly “convincing” argument structure. In simple terms most logical thought progresses in the way it has since the time of the Greeks –
Subject A leads to premise B which leads in its turn to conclusion C
Not so in the wondrous world of Jones.
Subject A leads to premise B and then to sub premise B1 which redirects to conclusion C
A simple example from a broadcast I heard; All Aborigines need education therefore we should build schools (simple logic).Jones’ logic – All Aborigines need education but because they are constantly drunk and do not attend school therefore we must redirect funding away from building schools for Aborigines.
By using a redirected premise to justify an illogical action there is an almost “convincing” conclusion drawn from all his arguments.The argument above is totally illogical but appeals to the conservative group because of its sense that saving money from a “misdirected cause” will help other people and it can be justified underneath the illogicality of what I call 1950’s ideology, which is intensely appealing to the over 60 groups that listen to his programme. So logic in its way is used as a direct ideological weapon,as is the case in politics.
.As he speaks on a daily basis to people who have little knowledge of philosophy and logic he will always get away with it, and few journalists actually see through it because of the same reasons and, over time, his illogic becomes the argument of the masses that follow.