Crusading in the Name of Logic: Item 2

Marketing is such a gold mine for infuriating twists of logic.  Yesterday evening I made the mistake of actually listening to the pitch for soup in a Campbell's commercial.  In amongst the implicit claims that their soup will make you healthy and happy and the envy of all your friends, was a glowing description of the product.  Among the wonder-ingredients?  "Farm-grown vegetables."

Wait.  What's so great about "farm-grown" vegetables?  What other kind is there? It's kind of like saying a particular soup is superior because it contains white -- yes, white! -- potatoes. 

A place where acres upon acres of crops are doused with chemicals, harvested by underpaid workers, and owned by a multinational corporation is still a farm.  I have all the respect in the world for farmers, and obviously, not every farm uses questionable tactics to turn a profit.  My point is that the phrase "farm-grown" provides essentially no information about the quality of the ingredients in a particular brand of soup.

Tell me the celery magically fell out of the sky. Then I'll be impressed.

Crusading in the Name of Logic: Wedding Edition

My idea for a whole series of posts pointing out that which is infuriatingly illogical hasn't really materialized yet. One post does not a series make. Well, there will be more on illogic from the world around me in the future, but for today the focus is the wedding-related illogic in my very own head. And yes, I am crusading against it.

I've been trying to keep the wedding craziness at bay, but it's been creeping in lately. Yesterday I had to remind myself that it does not matter whether we serve lemonade in a punch bowl or one of those cute glass decanters with a spigot. The SuperFiance helped me realize that we do not, in fact, need to put a personalized note to our guests on each and every favor, when a general thank you sign will serve the same purpose with much less risk to our sanity. There was also an alarming 15 second window during which I actually contemplated acquiring false eyelashes. (It has passed. I am me again.)

I think I might be battling genetics here. My (generous, talented, wonderful) mother is making our wedding cake, and she's taking worrying to new levels. Like, 6-test-cakes-in-the-past-two-weeks kind of levels. Requiring-our-taste-test-approval kind of levels. Um, it's cake -- pretty much always yummy.

So. We've tested the cake, and it was delicious, as I suspected. For good measure, we threw in a reminder (that I'd never have imagined would be necessary) that she should wear what she's comfortable with, colors be damned.* For our parts, The SuperFiance and I continue to remind each other what our priorities really are and what we should focus our energy on.

That, plus some running speedwork to boost the mood and clear the mind, and we should be good. I hope.



*Ok, I might not have worded it quite like that. But you get the idea.

Crusading in the Name of Logic: Item 1

Like I've said before, this is a things-I-like blog. One thing I'm a big fan of is logic. You know, rational thought, arguments that make sense and use words properly, that sort of thing. High on my dislike list is blatantly faulty logic masquerading as that which is valid. So, in the spirit of encouraging critical thinking and spreading sound reasoning throughout the land, I'm taking a page from Kelly's book and starting a series of posts about lapses in logic I notice around me. Join me as I shine a proverbial light on their insidiousness! (Note: Kelly is plenty logical, but what I'm getting at here is her use of the blog series concept, to great effect.)

So. First up, a radio station identification/advertising spot I heard yesterday that went a little something like this:

Do you like [xyz component of concerts]?

Yeah, we do too.

You're one of a kind.

You're just the type of person who should be listening to [radio station in question].

I paraphrased the last line, but otherwise it'e pretty accurate.

Now, maybe everyone who likes a particular part of the concert experience will in fact like the same radio station. The connection is thin, but it could be there. What I take issue with is the first three sentences, clearly designed to transition in order toward a supported conclusion. But -- and here's where my eye starts twitching from the sheer illogic of it all -- if you like X and everyone at the radio station likes X (which I assume they mean by the line "we do too"), then you're not one of a kind. Well, you might be, but certainly not because you like X. The only way that sentence makes any sense at all is if it's disconnected from everything that precedes it.

"Do you like X? We like X too. The sky is blue. You should listen to us." That would have about the same effect.

Wishing you all a happy, relaxing, and well-reasoned weekend!