Mission for Truth: Critical Thinking, Part 2: Ambiguity
MCS America News, Volume 3, Issue 3, March 2008

 
In a world where science is biased, facts are manipulated, doctors are mislead, industry acts to misinform, and few can be trusted, when it comes to controversial illnesses, such as multiple chemical sensitivity (MCS), fibromyalgia (FM), and chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS), patients, doctors, and researchers must employ critical thinking skills as they are essential to finding the truth.


Each month, this column explores methods of critical thinking necessary for scientists and patient to sort through the bunk and get to the facts and real truth.


Ambiguity
 
This month we will examine the pitfall of ambiguity.  Ambiguity is defined as being capable of being understood in two or more possible senses or ways.  Ambiguous statements do not communicate clear meaning.  Consider the following sentence:

 
“The law says citizens must stop drinking at midnight.”

 
Did you see more than one possible meaning?  Does the law say that citizens may not drink alcoholic beverages after midnight?  Or does it say that they may not drink anything at all… no water, no juice, no coffee?  Being alert to ambiguity is useful to sort through research and avoid being duped into buying or prescribing “miracle cures”. 

 
Ambiguous material often conflicts with itself and, therefore, requires critical thinking skills to think through to form an opinion.  Sometimes ambiguity is intended to confuse an issue and cast doubt. 

 
There are three types of ambiguity. 

 
Lexical ambiguity occurs when a word has more than one meaning.  The word “bank” may mean a financial institution or it may mean the edge of a river. 

 
Referential ambiguity occurs when it is unclear what a referring expression is referring to.  The statement “everyone knows that Noni juice can cure anything” uses referential ambiguity.  It is not clear who “everyone” is.  Does “everyone” refer to every person in the world, or every seller of Noni juice, or all doctors, or all scientists, or some other group?

 
Syntactic ambiguity occurs when a  complex expression has more than one reasonable meaning.  The sentence “We will be talking about romance on television” may be interpreted to mean we will be on television discussing romance.  It may also be interpreted as meaning we will be discussing romance that appears on television. 

 
Resolving ambiguous statements is referred to as disambiguation.  This can only be accomplished by clearly paying attention to what is said and expanding our thinking to encompass all the possibilities of meaning through asking questions.


A Practical Example

 
Let’s assume you are speaking with a new acquaintance and mention that you have a chronic illness in the course of discussion as you require accommodations.  The person you are speaking with immediately says, “You should try Noni juice.  It’s a healer and will cure you.” 

 
You ask for more information and are told, “Noni is a great product.  It’s cured the common cold, pain, fatigue, lack of energy, allergies, and cancer.  I can set you up to sell it too so you can earn money on this great product and buy your own supply at a great discount.” 

 
How do you proceed?  Do you try it?  Do you become excited that you’ve found this miracle cure?  Not so fast! 

 
First, let’s look back at what we learned last month.  Does the person who is sharing this information about Noni have credibility of the evidence?  Do you remember the five rules of credibility?

 
Reputation.  Since you’ve just met this person, you likely know little about his reputation and will need to do some homework. 

 
Ability to See.  It does not sound like this person has firsthand knowledge of these cures.  Since we are uncertain of this, it is necessary to ask questions such as:

· Is there published peer-reviewed double-blind research to support these cures?

· Have you conducted your own experiments?

· Have you been cured of any illness by Noni juice?

· Do you know the biological mechanism behind the disease you claim Noni will cure?

· Why don’t doctors recommend Noni if it’s a cure all?

 
Vested Interest.  Since the person is offering to “set you up to sell Noni juice and get discounts”, the logical question is if this is multi-level marketing.  If so, this person has a vested financial interest in signing you up and loses credibility.

 
Expertise.  Does this person have specialized education or knowledge about the diseases and symptoms mentioned?  Perhaps a PhD, an MD or ND, etc?  If not, the lack of expertise loses credibility.

 
Neutrality.  Is the person predisposed to a particular opinion about Noni as a result of their own healing?

 
It does not appear that our Noni juice salesperson is very credible.  After you ask your questions, he becomes more insistent and tells you “Everyone swears by Noni.”  Having learned about ambiguity, what do you say? 

 
Did you catch the ambiguous inference to “everyone”?  Who is “everyone”?  If everyone means all the people in the world, how come you don’t swear by Noni?  Is everyone the members of the multi-level marketing firm who have vested interests in the sale of Noni juice?  Why did the salesperson used the term “everyone” instead of specifying exactly who swears by Noni?  Could it be that he was intentionally confusing the issue by using ambiguous terminology to coerce you into believing him?

 
Lastly, if Noni was such a cure all, why is it that people still suffer from the illnesses the salesperson claimed Noni would cure?  Wouldn’t word spread quickly if Noni was indeed a cure all?

 
How will you spend your money?  Sadly, many people with chronic illnesses are desperate for a cure and most are willing to try anything.  Unfortunately, after years of trial and error, most realize they’ve been duped for hundreds or thousands of dollars with little or no improvement.

 
Precision of Language

 
Language should be precise to communicate exact truthful meaning.  Fuzzy or inexact vagueness should be avoided.  Can you identify vagueness? 

 
Vagueness is being used in an act of coercion  when someone says, “I can’t find any evidence showing it’s real, therefore it does not exist.”  This is a fuzzy interpretation of a logical overgenerality fallacy, as one cannot guarantee that evidence was not intentionally or even incompetently overlooked.  If evidence does not exist to the contrary position, can any conclusions really be drawn? 

 
Confused?  Good!  Because that’s exactly what people who use vagueness want.  They are hoping to confuse the issue and cast doubt where doubt does not exist.  A classic sign of vagueness is lack of proof.  Rather than presenting proof, people who employ vagueness present the lack of proof as an argument or supposition a position without adequate proof and state it in an authoritative fashion as though it is fact.  But is it?

 
If you’re new to critical thinking, you likely have a headache now.  Take some time to review this again and evaluate some common conversations with friends and family with a critical eye.  Then go unwind and we’ll see you next month for part 3 of
Mission for Truth.  

 

Copyrighted © 2008  MCS America