Everybody knows?

I made the mistake of saying "One of my friends..." in a conversation and the group 'Grammar Nazi' (G.N. for short) was all over me about how the right usage was 'One of my friend...' I mean, yeah, I know that this is how it is being used these days, but the proper usage of yore was the way I used it. I should have just let it go but was fool enough to argue. You know how that would have gone...the G.N. gave me the horse's laugh and said, "Everybody knows that the right usage is..." to a chorus of assents. Some gave me sympathetic looks pitying me for my ignorance; others sneered at me in contempt. And THAT was that.

You know how irritating it is to be the brunt of a G.N assault even when you are wrong. To not only be assaulted by a G.N but to be pitied by the junta when you are actually in the right...but THAT is the power of 'Everybody knows'. When everybody 'knows' a certain 'fact' then anything that contradicts it HAS to be wrong. Galileo (remember him?) was blinded for his folly of opposing what everybody knows. THAT is the power of the logical fallacy called 'argumentum ad populum' - the argument that what is popularly known is right.

Now, you see, Galileo was not talking of which politician was the better ruler or some such item of opinion which you could easily have a strong conviction against because you do not like the way he wears his moustache or some such important reason. Nope, our man was talking about the sun and earth and moon and about what went around what...and he backed it with observations. What, you see, we call science and what we assume is not subject to opinions. (An idea that scientists would scoff at...at ANY point in time scientists HAVE held opinions, it is just laymen who think there are no opinions in science. Einstein famously said, "God does not play dice" when faced with quantum physics or, more specifically, Heisenberg's uncertainty principle. Today there are multiple opinions about the nature of the universe - string theories, membrane theories, multiverse theories, what have you. Yet, people think of Science as absolute. The Truth MAY be absolute but what we KNOW as Science...THAT is different.)

So, if Galileo can be blinded for proclaiming a scientific discovery which the populace did not agree with, what's the point of fighting the populace on issues related to man-made things - like linguistics, governance, social norms etc? Yeah, yeah, I hear you, you say that Galileo was blinded by the Church and are off on your rant against religion. But, pray tell me, IF the populace had not believed that the Church IS right always and HAS the authority to act as it did, could the same thing have happened? No.

The ONLY thing which can fight argumentum ad populum is another logical fallacy - Authority bias. IF someone in authority opposed the popular opinion, the populace can be swayed. But, remember, authority itself HAS to be granted BY the populace. As in, the true authority on Science, of the two, was Galileo and not the Church. But the populace granted authority to the Church to decide on matters of science as well. Ergo... (WHY do I call Authority Bias a fallacy even when it supports the right thing? Because, the people who ACCEPT the ruling think it is right ONLY because an Authority has said so and not on any other rational basis.)

Now, the populace makes itself heard very loudly indeed thanks to social media. One only hopes that, where it is wrong, an acceptable authority stands in opposition to correct the error.

Otherwise, one fine day, we may find ourselves expecting to float in the air because the populace has repealed the law of gravitation!