BS Summary: This article contains 27 faulty reasoning types, including Attempt to Sell a Product or Service, Biased Writer Voice, and Appeal to Authority, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 15.6% saturation with 131 hits. Analysis detected 1,243 faulty-reasoning hits from 839 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 38.6% and a BS Rank of 40% (16,914 of 28,109 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 60.20% of the article peer group.

Dear Eric: My husband has struggled with problem drinking for years. 
At different points over the past several years, he has suffered legal consequences and lost a job. 
After a recent hospital stay, he stopped drinking for many months. 
Just recently, he has started to drink again, he claims “just here and there.” 
It is bothering me and other members of our family because we see it as a slippery slope. 
However, his mother, who he is close with, refuses to acknowledge his problem. 
She blamed his hospital stay on poor diet despite the doctor’s diagnosis that his health condition was caused by excessive alcohol consumption. 
Most recently, she walked into a family event where no one else was drinking (except my husband), put down a bottle of wine, and said “let’s party.” 
How can I let her know without offending her that her “accepting” behavior is impeding his recovery? 
 Concerned Spouse 
Dear Concerned: You may have to risk offending but consider that a small price to pay in the interest of your husband’s health and safety. 
The kind of denial that your mother-in-law is exhibiting is one of the things that organizations like Al-Anon and SMART Recovery Family were made for. 
These meetings can help family members of those who struggle with alcohol abuse to recognize the problem, to understand the limits of their own power to make their loved one change and to start processing their own feelings about their loved one’s drinking. 
If you aren’t already going to meetings like this, look into them. 
You can go in person or online. 
You are surely carrying a lot of emotional  and perhaps legal or financial  baggage as a result of your husband’s drinking and it will be helpful to talk it through and get strategies from people who’ve walked the same road. 
You, unfortunately, can’t control what your mother-in-law does or thinks. 
That’s something she has to reckon with on her own. 
That isn’t to say you shouldn’t talk to her about it. 
You can use “I” statements to reflect what you’ve experienced with regard to your husband’s drinking and make requests about how she behaves around him. 
But it’s up to her to modify her behavior and, ultimately, it’s up to your husband to take responsibility for his drinking and seek treatment that works for him. 
You can support him in this; you can attend meetings with him; you can invite his mother to Al-Anon or SMART Recovery Family meetings, but they have to take the step with you. 
Dear Eric: My son, who is in his mid-20s, is in a long-term relationship with James, who is 10 years his senior. 
James graduated with a mechanical engineering degree in 2023 but remains unemployed. 
While James has applied for several positions, he has not had any success. 
He refuses to consider work outside of his very specific field, and as a result, my son is entirely supporting him financially, including paying off James’ student loans. 
James refuses to consider part-time employment or even volunteering as a way to network and potentially expand his exposure to employment opportunities and networking. 
My son has confided in me that he is growing very frustrated with this situation. 
While I try to listen without judgment and remain supportive, I am becoming increasingly concerned that James is taking advantage of him. 
Should I speak up to James and let him know what I think about the situation or should I keep my opinions to myself? 
 Helpful Mother 
Dear Helpful: Split the difference. 
Don’t speak with James because if you do so, you’ll be inserting yourself into an ongoing conflict in your son’s relationship in a way that will pull the focus away from a solution. 
James’ “problem” becomes his mother-in-law rather than his work situation and the way it’s impacting his partner. 
James and your son need to work this out, but it isn’t likely that your push will be the thing that finally snaps him out of this rut. 
However, you can ask your son if he’s open to advice and, if so, tell him what you’re seeing and suggest he be more firm or open with James about what’s going on. 
Your son may need someone he trusts to tell him that this isn’t something he has to put up with. 
Because he’s in his 20s, he may not have the experience of communicating through conflict with a partner and could benefit from some mentorship in how to have these kinds of conversations. 
Because he’s younger than James, he also may not feel empowered to fully speak his mind or he may think, at least in the back of his mind, that James must know better than him. 
So, your voice  as support rather than critique  will be critical. 
(Send questions to R. 
Eric Thomas at eric@askingeric.com or P.O. 
Box 22474, Philadelphia, PA 19110. 
Follow him on Instagram and sign up for his weekly newsletter at rericthomas.com.) 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 0.0%R. Eric Thomas: 2.0%Baltimore Sun: 1.4%Confirmation Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%R. Eric Thomas: 0.4%Baltimore Sun: 0.8%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 2.4%R. Eric Thomas: 1.7%Baltimore Sun: 1.9%Availability Heuristic2.4%This article: 8.0%R. Eric Thomas: 0.7%Baltimore Sun: 0.6%Representativeness Heuristic8.0%This article: 2.0%R. Eric Thomas: 0.2%Baltimore Sun: 0.3%Hindsight Bias2.0%This article: 3.9%R. Eric Thomas: 0.8%Baltimore Sun: 0.6%Overconfidence Bias3.9%This article: 2.0%R. Eric Thomas: 1.2%Baltimore Sun: 3.0%Framing Effect2.0%This article: 3.0%R. Eric Thomas: 0.7%Baltimore Sun: 0.5%Loss Aversion3.0%This article: 0.0%R. Eric Thomas: 0.5%Baltimore Sun: 0.4%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%R. Eric Thomas: 0.4%Baltimore Sun: 0.1%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 5.1%R. Eric Thomas: 2.6%Baltimore Sun: 1.8%Optimism Bias5.1%This article: 8.1%R. Eric Thomas: 1.4%Baltimore Sun: 0.9%Pessimism Bias8.1%This article: 15.6%R. Eric Thomas: 4.5%Baltimore Sun: 5.7%Negativity Bias15.6%This article: 0.0%R. Eric Thomas: 1.6%Baltimore Sun: 0.7%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 10.5%R. Eric Thomas: 3.0%Baltimore Sun: 1.0%Fundamental Attribution Error10.5%This article: 0.0%R. Eric Thomas: 0.5%Baltimore Sun: 0.2%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%R. Eric Thomas: 0.3%Baltimore Sun: 0.4%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%R. Eric Thomas: 0.1%Baltimore Sun: 0.2%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%R. Eric Thomas: 0.8%Baltimore Sun: 1.3%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%R. Eric Thomas: 0.1%Baltimore Sun: 0.1%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%R. Eric Thomas: 0.0%Baltimore Sun: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 3.2%R. Eric Thomas: 0.6%Baltimore Sun: 1.0%Recency Bias3.2%This article: 0.0%R. Eric Thomas: 0.1%Baltimore Sun: 0.1%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%R. Eric Thomas: 0.1%Baltimore Sun: 0.0%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%R. Eric Thomas: 0.2%Baltimore Sun: 0.2%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%R. Eric Thomas: 0.1%Baltimore Sun: 0.0%Straw Man0.0%This article: 10.7%R. Eric Thomas: 1.1%Baltimore Sun: 1.8%Appeal to Authority10.7%This article: 9.5%R. Eric Thomas: 1.9%Baltimore Sun: 1.0%False Dilemma9.5%This article: 2.1%R. Eric Thomas: 0.3%Baltimore Sun: 0.4%Slippery Slope2.1%This article: 0.0%R. Eric Thomas: 0.1%Baltimore Sun: 0.1%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 5.7%R. Eric Thomas: 3.4%Baltimore Sun: 2.5%Hasty Generalization5.7%This article: 2.0%R. Eric Thomas: 0.1%Baltimore Sun: 0.1%Red Herring2.0%This article: 0.0%R. Eric Thomas: 0.1%Baltimore Sun: 0.2%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 5.0%R. Eric Thomas: 1.9%Baltimore Sun: 2.6%Appeal to Emotion5.0%This article: 0.0%R. Eric Thomas: 0.2%Baltimore Sun: 0.4%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 3.9%R. Eric Thomas: 0.8%Baltimore Sun: 1.4%Post Hoc (False Cause)3.9%This article: 0.0%R. Eric Thomas: 0.0%Baltimore Sun: 0.0%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 3.0%R. Eric Thomas: 0.2%Baltimore Sun: 0.2%Burden of Proof3.0%This article: 0.0%R. Eric Thomas: 0.2%Baltimore Sun: 0.1%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 3.8%R. Eric Thomas: 0.2%Baltimore Sun: 0.1%Composition/Division3.8%This article: 3.2%R. Eric Thomas: 2.2%Baltimore Sun: 1.2%Anecdotal3.2%This article: 0.0%R. Eric Thomas: 0.0%Baltimore Sun: 0.0%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 4.2%R. Eric Thomas: 0.7%Baltimore Sun: 0.8%Ambiguity (Equivocation)4.2%This article: 0.0%R. Eric Thomas: 0.0%Baltimore Sun: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.6%R. Eric Thomas: 0.2%Baltimore Sun: 0.0%Middle Ground0.6%This article: 0.0%R. Eric Thomas: 0.1%Baltimore Sun: 0.0%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%R. Eric Thomas: 0.1%Baltimore Sun: 0.1%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%R. Eric Thomas: 0.0%Baltimore Sun: 0.0%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 1.7%R. Eric Thomas: 1.1%Baltimore Sun: 1.1%Unattributed Quote1.7%This article: 0.0%R. Eric Thomas: 0.2%Baltimore Sun: 0.3%Quote-first Misdirection0.0%This article: 11.4%R. Eric Thomas: 2.0%Baltimore Sun: 2.5%Biased Writer Voice11.4%This article: 4.4%R. Eric Thomas: 6.6%Baltimore Sun: 1.9%Indoctrination4.4%This article: 0.0%R. Eric Thomas: 0.0%Baltimore Sun: 0.1%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%R. Eric Thomas: 0.0%Baltimore Sun: 0.1%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 12.9%R. Eric Thomas: 1.3%Baltimore Sun: 2.0%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…12.9%

839 words analyzed.

Speakers

No attributed speakers were identified in this analysis.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.