This is the amateur way of constructing an argument – it’s the method we tend to use when arguing with people we are close to. The human brain is amazingly interconnected, and single thoughts often remind us of other things that are somehow linked to that original thought in our own minds.
These associations originate in various ways, such as objects created for very different purposes (or no purpose at all) having one similar use – for example, a coaster was created with the specific purpose of creating a barrier between a container of liquid and a surface so as to prevent staining the surface, but your partner’s new glossy fashion magazine seems to do that job just as well. Or they could arise from connections in time – memory harking us back to other things we encountered at the same time as what we are thinking about.
These types of connections are not always frivolous, and can actually serve as a powerful aid in sorting out and classifying new things and experiences, so it is not a huge leap within our minds to conflate that mental connection with actual, real-world connection. Our thoughts jump from one thing to another, flittering about in a way impossible to comprehend to anyone else, hence the name – butterfly logic. Here is an example:
Tammy told Jeff not to put his beer directly on the coffee table – it causes unsightly rings.
Jeff sees Tammy’s new glossy magazine on the table – hey! A handy barrier!
Tammy comes in and sees the beer can slowly dripping condensation onto her magazine. It reminds her of all the other times Jeff has taken her suggestions way too literally and freaks out, shouting about how he “always does this”.
Jeff is reminded by Tammy’s outburst of the last time she flipped out at him like that – when he came home late after going to watch a football game at his best friend’s house. He rejoinders that she never lets him do anything he wants and won’t even let him spend time with his friends.
Tammy is reminded by this of how her dad used to make the same leaps of subject and calls Jeff just like her dad.
And so on, and so on…
The weakness of this type of thinking in constructing an argument is immediately obvious: the connections inside the individual’s own mind are in most cases absolutely unique to them. Others cannot see the linkages that may seem so obvious to you, so it is almost impossible to use them to convince them to your way of thinking, no matter how strident or eloquent you are.
There is also the fact that the connections could be just plain wrong – the human mind is not naturally rational, and the connections we make might not be either. It’s important to be able to recognize butterfly thinking in yourself, then, so that you can first of all avoid using it to support your arguments and find a better way to get your point across; and second of all so that you can analyze whether the point you are trying to make is truly cogent. Bad reasoning identified and eliminated by you is a lot of effort, time and reputation saved.
Sticking to this type of argument when one does not have any other types of reasoning to stand on often leads down the spiral of destructive arguments, as one is forced more and more to rely on emphatic statements, raised voices and ignoring the opponent’s points simply to uphold one’s own preconceived notions.
