Appeal to novelty: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 10: | Line 10: | ||
The opposite of an appeal to novelty is an [[appeal to tradition]], in which one argues that the "old ways" are always superior to new ideas. |
The opposite of an appeal to novelty is an [[appeal to tradition]], in which one argues that the "old ways" are always superior to new ideas. |
||
The appeal to novelty is based on the reasoning that in general people will tend to try to improve the outputs resulting from their efforts. Thus, for example, a company producing a product might be assumed to know about existing flaws and to be seeking to correct them in a future revision. This line of reasoning is obviously flawed for many reasons, most notably that it ignores motive (a new product may be released that is functionally identical to previous products but with new packaging to maintain a revenue stream), it ignores cyclicality (the fashion industry continually rediscovers old styles and markets them as the next new thing), and it ignores population dynamics (the previous product may have been created by an expert who has since been replaced by a [[neophyte]]). |
|||
The appeal to novelty has a logical basis. In this case, it's that whoever is making the new stuff would know about the old mistakes, and correct them. This has two problems. One, is that they often don't, and two, is that they often make new ones! |
|||
''See also: [[radicalism]]'' |
''See also: [[radicalism]]'' |
||
Revision as of 23:36, 28 January 2006
The appeal to novelty (also called argumentum ad novitatem) is a logical fallacy in which someone claims that his or her idea or proposal is correct or superior because it is new and modern. Some examples are:
- "If you want to lose weight, your best bet is to follow the latest diet."
- "The department will become more profitable because it has been reorganised."
- "Our progressive policies will replace the government's outdated medieval dogma."
- "Upgrading all your software to the most recent versions will make your system more reliable."
Appeals to novelty are often successful in a modern world where everyone is eager to be on the "cutting edge" of technology. The so-called "Dot-com bust" of the early 2000s could easily be interpreted as a sign of the dangers of naïvely embracing new ideas without first viewing them with a critical eye. Also, advertisers frequently extoll the newness of their products as a reason to buy.
The opposite of an appeal to novelty is an appeal to tradition, in which one argues that the "old ways" are always superior to new ideas.
The appeal to novelty is based on the reasoning that in general people will tend to try to improve the outputs resulting from their efforts. Thus, for example, a company producing a product might be assumed to know about existing flaws and to be seeking to correct them in a future revision. This line of reasoning is obviously flawed for many reasons, most notably that it ignores motive (a new product may be released that is functionally identical to previous products but with new packaging to maintain a revenue stream), it ignores cyclicality (the fashion industry continually rediscovers old styles and markets them as the next new thing), and it ignores population dynamics (the previous product may have been created by an expert who has since been replaced by a neophyte).
See also: radicalism