The recent surge in vaccine safety debates has brought up a flawed argument that experts are reluctant to study vaccines due to a lack of data. However, this claim is often used as a ploy to discredit established scientific evidence.
Proponents of vaccination like Robert F. Kennedy Jr., who advocates for research into chronic diseases, use the “square one” fallacy. They argue that no studies exist on a particular topic before claiming it needs further investigation. This fallacy relies on the misconception that there is an absolute absence of data, when in fact, many areas have a substantial scientific literature.
In reality, numerous studies on vaccine safety already exist. The debate over vaccine efficacy and side effects has been extensively researched for decades. Moreover, there are existing bodies of knowledge on other topics, such as psi phenomena like telepathy, which have led to skepticism about poorly conducted “studies” that rely on trickery.
By using the square one fallacy, disingenuous actors aim to appear reasonable and unbiased while pushing for studies that support their views. This tactic is often employed to avoid confronting established scientific evidence that contradicts their opinions.
It’s essential to recognize this fallacy and understand that experts are not starting from a blank slate when it comes to vaccine safety or any other topic with an existing scientific literature.
Source: https://www.mcgill.ca/oss/article/critical-thinking/square-one-fallacy