Jerry Falwell Conditional Syllogism

Rev. Jerry Falwell utilized conditional syllogism of affirmation, modus ponens, in order to lead his readers to his conclusion. In doing so, Falwell used evidentiary induction, argument from authority, and avoided the use of the non sequitur fallacy.

Falwell used conditional syllogism of affirmation, modus ponens, to appeal to deductive logic. The major premise of this particular syllogism was if Tinky Winky is gay, then parents should not allow their children to watch The Teletubies. The minor premise affirmed the conditional clause of the major premise. Latterly, the conclusion being, therefore conscientious parents should not allow their children to watch The Teletubies, affirmed the second clause of the major premise.

Evidentiary induction

was used by Rev. Jerry Falwell in order to draw a conclusion about the sexual orientation of Tinky Winky, although, not each particular detail is not completely conclusive. For instance, Tinky Winky had been carrying a purse, a common female accessory, which may have been for its rightful female owner. Additionally, the color purple that was assigned, to Tinky Winky, may have been for reasons completely isolated from the gay pride movement. Perhaps the shape of a triangle, the gay pride symbol, was selected for Tinky Winky because it is one of the most basic shapes for children to learn. Although Falwell used these details to convey his conclusion, there is still an unlikely possibility that all of this evidence may indeed be coincidental. This amount of evidence and the very details of this evidence points towards the conclusion that Tinky Winky was intentionally made a gay character.

Falwell utilized argument from authority to make his conclusion about Tinky Winky being gay seem more convincing. To illustrate, a Washington Post editorial made it appear as though Tinky Winky was the new chief national gay representative instead of Ellen DeGeneres. Being that the Washington Post is a well-respected source and printed in a very forward thinking community, numerous people read it and may have been convinced that Tinky Winky was indeed gay. Therefore a large number of people probably believed that Tinky Winky was intended to be a gay character.

The non sequitur fallacy was not committed, by Falwell, to justify his conclusion. The major premise had two clauses that have a genuine relationship. If Tinky Winky is gay, clause one, has a direct influence on clause two, if Falwell would like parents to not allow their children to watch The Teletubies. These two clauses are directly related because Falwell needed to not ruin the formal validity of a deduction by modus ponens when addressing such a controversial subject.