Argument by Personal Charm
Accepting a claim because the speaker is charming or flattering substitutes a personal impression for reasons relevant to the claim. Charm can make an argument more persuasive without making it stronger.
THE IDEA
Description
An argument may seem more persuasive because of the speaker’s personal characteristics, or “charm”. The fallacy is treating that appeal as evidence for an unrelated claim.
Example #1
Person A: “Abortion is wrong.” Person B: “How can you say that? You’re so charming and eloquent! I agree with you.” Explanation: The charm of the arguer is irrelevant to the issue of abortion.
Example #2
A car salesman says, “I know this car has some issues, but you seem like a smart, attractive person—I’m sure you’ll love it!” Explanation: Flattery does not answer the concern about the car’s condition. If charm replaces relevant evidence, it is being used fallaciously; a pleasant manner alone is not the error.
Exception
If the argument being made is directly related to the charm of the arguer, as in arguing that he or she would be the better host for a new show where charm does matter, then no fallacy has been committed.
Tip
If you are a natural charmer, don’t be afraid to use it – just not at the expense of valid claims and strong evidence.
When to use it
During a political debate, a candidate uses charisma to avoid answering a tough question.
In a sales pitch, a charming presenter sells a flawed product by flattering the audience.
In a job interview, a candidate's charm overshadows their lack of qualifications, leading to a poor hiring decision.
In a courtroom, a lawyer's eloquence sways the jury despite weak evidence.
FROM THEORY TO EVERYDAY LIFE
In practice
Abortion Debate
Person A: “Abortion is wrong.” Person B: “How can you say that? You’re so charming and eloquent! I agree with you.” Explanation: The charm of the arguer is irrelevant to the issue of abortion.
Car Salesman
A car salesman says, “I know this car has some issues, but you seem like a smart, attractive person—I’m sure you’ll love it!” Explanation: The compliment does not resolve the car’s problems. Letting it affect the decision in place of evidence about the car would be the error.
A MOMENT TO REFLECT
Put it to work.
When have you been swayed by someone's charm rather than the strength of their argument?
How can you identify when charm is being used to cover weak logic?
What strategies can you use to separate the message from the messenger in a discussion?
CONTINUE THE CONVERSATION
Source texts
- Logically Fallacious - The Ultimate Collection of Over 300 Logical Fallacies