I know you are but what am I?

“It is the cause, my soul. It is the cause.” ~Hamlet

Bulverism, as C.S. Lewis calls it in his same titled essay, is the illogical, childish counter argument that sometimes comes when people attempt to defeat an argument they haven't thought through. For the questions that have no immediate answers, Bulverism, as Lewis explains, seems to have become the laymen’s means of defeating argument without logic. But is resorting to attacks on character an actual argument defeater? The answer is no.

A classic Bulverist attempt to skirt an argument is an attack on the person arguing. We see is time and again in the news and especially during presidential debates. It the childish answer of, “you shouldn’t trust him because he’s a…” If the answer to what truth is was simply truth, philosophers would have gone home and closed up shop years ago. It would seem that the mainstream’s lack of effort within the field of argument has left a bad taste in Lewis’s mouth.

Logical argument is quantifiable. The facts are true and false. The conclusions valid or invalid. If the logic is not sound then you go back and figure out what is. “I know you are but what am I?” responses do nothing but hinder the pursuit of truth. In fact, these responses do nothing but distract from the actual issue at hand, which is that the person speaking has no answer as to why the argument he is facing is false, and thus is truly a fool.

So if Bulverism is only a means to show your “lack of brightness”, why is it so appealing? It is quick. In one statement, another person’s character has been drug through the mental mud of his audience. It’s the emotional tug of hearing someone is a “republican” or a “foreigner” that creates in the minds of those around them the hatred and distrust that “wins” the debate. That is where Bulverism is truly horrible. The untried audience becomes quick to judge the person, forgetting the argument for their own emotional well-being.

But searching for the motivation of the opponent usually derives this attack on character. The easiest way to combat Bulverism is to examine the motives of the Bulverist, mainly his foolishness, in order to recognize the deceit that is inherit in such general and faulty statements which come from the fear of not having the answer.

Another way to combat the Bulverist is to ignore them. We know they are spouting hot air because they have no argument for their cause, so find someone with an actual argument. C.S Lewis claims that the opponent of the Bulverist is someone whose argument is daunting enough to said Bulverist that all they can do is assault the character of that person. The easiest way to assess for yourself what is truth is to go out and search for it.

In today’s modern society, information free-flows much faster than ever before. Surly with all the advantages we have, Bulverism should not be an option when confronting an argument. And Bulverism should certainly not be treated as an acceptable answer to any argument we have. This mental laziness is something to fear and despise above any type of emotional pay off Bulverism provides.