2. In 2004 Z is having a conversation with his friend X and X’s wife Y. Y is a U.S. citizen and a ‘Bushy’ (a supporter of George W. Bush). She is planning on voting for Bush in the upcoming presidential election. Z and X (both are Canadian citizens, not Americans; one liberal and one conservative) are both arguing that Bush is not the best choice for President (primarily on the basis that Bush is an ‘unreflective’ man and that such a man should not occupy the most powerful executive office in the world). After listening to the supporting evidence offered by Z and X, Y responds to their argument as follows: “You’re not Americans, [therefore] your opinions don’t count.”
There is a hidden premise in Y’s argument and an ambiguity regarding what does not count. One interpretation of Y’s argument is as follows:
P1. You’re not Americans
P2. Only American opinions have value
MC. Therefore, your opinions don’t count
This interpretation of the argument is obviously weak as Premise 2 is unacceptable by observation (recall Assignment 4).
There is another plausible interpretation of what Y means by ‘opinions not counting’ that raises an entirely different problem for the argument. You must provide that alternative as the hidden premise and identify the problem that this alternative interpretation of Y’s argument raises. (Worth 2 marks)
What now????
The alternative interpretation of Y's argument is as follows:
P1. You’re not Americans
P2. Only American opinions have influence on the outcome of the U.S. presidential election
MC. Therefore, your opinions don’t count in determining the outcome of the election
The problem with this alternative interpretation is that it assumes that only the opinions of American citizens can affect the outcome of the U.S. presidential election. This interpretation raises the issue of voter influence and the idea that only American citizens, through their votes, have the power to shape the election results.
The problem with this assumption is that it disregards the fact that the opinions and arguments put forth by non-American individuals can still have an influence on American voters. Political debates, media coverage, and international opinions can all shape the narratives and discussions around the election, potentially swaying American voters one way or another.
Therefore, Y's argument that the opinions of Z and X don't count based on their non-American citizenship ignores the potential indirect influence that their opinions might still have on American voters.