Suppressed Evidence Fallacy Examples

Let’s examine some suppressed evidence fallacy examples in this post. The discussion of inductive arguments explains that a cogent inductive argument must have sound reasoning and true premises. However, since every premise that is present must be accurate, every accurate premise must mention. Every time specific and important information gets obsolete for any reason. The fallacy known as Suppressed Evidence is committed.

Because it assumes that the true premises are complete, the fallacy of suppressed evidence is also known as a fallacy of presumption.

When we fail to take into account or simply disregard evidence that is likely to be relevant to an argument, we make the fallacy of suppressed or neglected evidence. In this instance, we may include relevant premises, but we mistakenly omit additional relevant data. Of course, we can’t examine every piece of data that might be important. But we must never ignore the evidence that we are aware of. Or that seems to have a good chance of being relevant. 

Ignoring evidence that both supports our position and the alternative is one of the simplest ways to make our position appear strong and alternative positions appear weak. Therefore, it should not come as a surprise that important information ignores in partisan arguments. Attorneys only present evidence in court to support their own arguments. It only shows one side of the advertisement only. Candidates hardly ever present more than one side of an issue during political debates. In debates over public policy, politicians on both sides of the aisle frequently only cite data to support their positions. Churches rarely talk about the deaths of children from illness and poverty.

Know The Difference Between Thinking Clearly And Winning An Argument

It is frequently unrealistic to anticipate those engaged in vehement debates on these subjects to present both sides of the argument in a fair and impartial manner. There is frequently a significant difference between thinking clearly and winning an argument, so when making a decision, such as when serving on a jury or casting a vote in an election, we should take into account as much of the available evidence from both sides of the debate as possible. We also can’t rely on those who disagree with a viewpoint to present it objectively. Especially when the subject at hand is divisive or arouses strong emotions. 

The fallacy of suppressed evidence should be there sparingly whenever you come across an argument that leaves out what appears to be important information. It is important to determine whether the argument falls victim to one of the fallacies we have already discussed. Also essential is a thorough defense of the argument’s weaknesses. We’ll look at the Suppressed Evidence Fallacy Examples in detail. 

Here Are Suppressed Evidence Fallacy Examples 

Example 1

A friend of mine owns one of those cheaply made bikes, and it constantly causes him problems. 

Although it might seem like a reasonable statement, there are probably a lot of other things that aren’t being said. For instance, the friend might neglect to maintain the bike properly or skip routine oil changes. Another possibility is that the friend simply doesn’t do a good job because he sees himself as a mechanic.

Advertising is arguably where the fallacy of Suppressed Evidence is used most frequently. The overwhelming majority of marketing campaigns highlight the positive aspects of a product while downplaying negative or problematic aspects.

Example 2

You don’t need to buy expensive extra equipment to watch a variety of channels on each television in the house when you have digital cable. However, when using satellite TV, each set needs its own piece of hardware. As a result, digital cable offers a better value.

Although the aforementioned premises are true and do lead to the conclusion, they omit to mention the fact that having an independent cable on more than one TV is rarely or never necessary if you’re a single person. Because this information ignores the aforementioned argument falls prey to the fallacy of Suppressed Evidence.

This fallacy is occasionally used in scientific research when a researcher concentrates on data. That tends to support their hypothesis rather than data that tends to challenge it. Experiments must be repeatable by others in order for the specifics of how they were completed to be made available. Other researchers might come across the information that was initially missing.

Example 3 

“In God, We Trust” is on our currency. This proves that we reside in a Christian country and that our government acknowledges this.

In this case, it is important to remember that these words were only made required on our currency in the 1950s, a time when communism was viewed with great suspicion. The idea that this is politically a “Christian Nation” is much less likely given how recent these words are and how they primarily reflect opposition to the Soviet Union.

Example 4 

Buying the Cray Mac 11 computer was the right move for our company. It will deliver quickly, meet our business needs, run the programs we want it to run, and cost a lot less than we had anticipated.

This seems like a good argument, but you’d change your mind if you learn that the speaker had consciously hidden the relevant evidence that the company’s Cray Mac 11 acquires from his brother-in-law for 30% more than it could have been elsewhere and if you learned that the Cray Mac 11 placed relatively low in a recent unbiased analysis of ten comparable computers.

We can also assert that the fallacy of suppressed evidence exists when the relevant information accidentally overlooks rather than is purposefully hide. Despite the fact that the fallacy’s name is misleading in this case. The other name of this fallacy is the Fallacy of Incomplete Evidence and cherry-picking the evidence.

The Ending Note 

By being cautious when conducting any kind of research on a topic, you can avoid falling victim to the fallacy of Suppressed Evidence. If you want to support a claim, you should look for evidence that directly refutes it. Rather than just supporting your assumptions or beliefs.

By doing this, you increase the likelihood that you won’t forget crucial information and decrease the possibility that someone will genuinely charge that you were a victim of this fallacy.

We truly hope that this article on “Suppressed Evidence Fallacy Examples” was helpful to you.

Leave a Comment