The Fallacy of Y2K

Logic can be a humbling experience. We’d like to tell you the story of how expensive one logical mistake was for us.

This story begins in 1998 when we heard on a talk show that computers would crash on New Year’s Day, 2000 – everything that uses a computer would stop working. We were told to trade our electric appliances for propane appliances and to stockpile gasoline and toothpaste.

Up to this point, we prided ourselves for being logical. Our parents taught us to notice the different ways people reason – the way an Indian might learn to sense every sound in the forest. If you visited our family, you would notice how much we talk about logic. This is the story of how logic humbled us.

Our family spent time and money preparing for Y2K and the end of the world-as-we-know-it. But as we work, a small doubt tugs at our mind. Everyone we respect warns us to prepare for the worst, but could there be an error in our reasoning? As the 2000 date draws closer . . . and arrives . . . and we still have electricity, we think to ourselves, “I hope we never learn this lesson again.”

We’d fallen for a logical error called faulty appeal to authority.

Faulty Appeal to Authority #1

A faulty appeal to authority is when someone supports his viewpoint with the authority of someone who has no special knowledge of that subject. The following is an example of a correct appeal to authority.

You My car won’t start.

Car Mechanic You pumped diesel fuel in your gasoline engine. We’ll have to clean out the cylinders before it’ll start.

You trust your car mechanic because he’s shown that he knows how to fix cars. However, the following is a faulty appeal to authority.

You My computer won’t start.

Car Mechanic Pour a quart of motor oil in the top. That works for me.

You shouldn’t trust your car mechanic about computers because he’s never shown that he knows how to fix them.

Before Y2K, many people wrote books on why it would change history. But many of these authors never showed how they had any special knowledge of computers. They were experts in other fields, like survival preparedness or how to invest in gold and silver collectors’ coins, not computers. My family trusted them and we were misled.

Faulty Appeal to Authority #2

But there is a second way to commit a faulty appeal to authority. If a person supports his viewpoint with the authority of only one expert in a field when there is much disagreement among experts on that issue, this is also a faulty appeal to authority.

Your Pediatrician Remember to give your child a balanced diet and make sure he gets plenty of sleep.

It is quite reasonable to trust your pediatrician’s advice on this. Your pediatrician has shown he understands the health and well-being of children, and pediatricians generally agree on this issue. However, should you trust the following advice?

Your Pediatrician Never spank your child. It might hurt his emotional development.

There is much disagreement on this issue among qualified experts. In this case, it isn’t wise to rely on the advice of only one expert. You need to study the issue yourself.

Before Y2K, some computer experts said computers would crash. But many disagreed and said the Y2K problem would be fixed on time. Instead of educating ourselves about both sides of this controversy, we only listened to the side we felt comfortable trusting. This is how we committed the second type of faulty appeal to authority.

Do you see why Y2K had a lot to do with logic?

Our Lesson

We want to leave you with this lesson. We’ve experienced first-hand how much trouble a fallacy can cause. But we learned something. Before Y2K, we used our mind to criticize people and find their lack of logic, but Y2K taught us our own lack of logic. Logic can be a humbling experience.

First appeared in Homeschooling Today magazine, January-February 2005.

Facebook Comments

Site Comments

1 • Andrei MR • May 13, 2008 • 5:52 PM

Your article is excellent! Instead of relying on faith that an expert’s argument is current, one should always try to understand it. I certainly understood the Y2K problem. Around that time, I worked to resolve Y2K issues on a number of systems. I also understood that the problem was largely resolved. So did the leading expert at the time, Peter Jaeger, who—after identifying the problem and mobilizing everyone to address it—recognized in the months leading up to the New Year that the problem had largely been solved. (I wasn’t worried either by the time Y2K arrived, and made no preparations at all.)

2 • Anonymous • January 08, 2009 • 5:39 AM

Isn’t the Bible an appeal to authority for justifying God and everything about God?

3 • Benjamin • January 16, 2009 • 2:44 PM

The Bible is indeed an authority to which Christians should appeal.  The fallacy discussed in the article is a faulty appeal to authority, that is an appeal to people who aren’t really authorities at all in that subject or to experts who only represent one side of a controversial issue.  Christians accept the Bible as an authority because it is God’s special revelation.  Some of the most convincing reasons to trust the Bible as a valid authority include internal evidence such as it’s continuity and external evidence such as it’s historical accuracy.  This suggests we can trust it as a historical document.  Jesus Christ himself trusted Scripture and his identity as God certainly carries some weight.  I think the evidences of Jesus’ resurrection including the empty tomb, the many eyewitnesses, the changed lives of his disciples, and the rapid spread of the gospel testify to the authority of Jesus and consequently, of the Bible.  As the very Word of God it is the very highest and truest authority to which we could appeal.

4 • Ryan • March 15, 2011 • 9:18 PM

Not to bump this topic by two years or anything, but the above comment definitely uses circular reasoning. I’m a Christian, and I get what they mean, but seriously. “Jesus is God (because scripture says so), and he uses scripture as a source, so scripture must be true.”

5 • Benjamin • March 16, 2011 • 10:40 PM

Ha. No problem bumping up the thread.  I see what you mean—my attempted argument does seem circular.  I’d like to try again in case any readers have questions on the authority of the Bible.  You can let me know if the argument succeeds this time.

My first points were that the Bible’s internal continuity and external corroboration supported its credibility.  I next suggested that Jesus trusted Scripture, so we should too.  Here is where I went awry.  First of all, the scripture of Jesus’ day was the Hebrew Bible.  Therefore Jesus’ recognition of scripture’s authority can apply only to what Christians call the Old Testament.

To prove that Jesus had the authority to call the OT an authority, we could consider the New Testament, but to jump outside the circle, we could look at external testimony such as the empty tomb, changed lives of the disciples, and rapid spread of the gospel.  These can be used to support Jesus’ authority independent of the NT.

Any better?  Comments welcome.

6 • Ed • May 10, 2011 • 5:49 PM

I believe there is evidence that every worldview is ultimately circular - including the Christian one.  But since all worldviews are essentially circular, we are on level ground.  The question is of logical ohesiveness and evidence that persuades.  We cannot prove any worldview, for every worldview contains metaphysical statements.  I would put forth “There is a God and unless he takes the initiative to speak, we can know nothing.”

Commenting is not available in this channel entry.

Sign Up!

Join the The Fallacy Detective News and receive "The Fallacy Detective Test" for free!