For the last few days I’ve had a little fun at my tormentors’ expense. Why not? Fallacy theory is easy, in Army and Guard attempts to justify action and inaction fallacies are numerous, and I’ve been dying to put my overpriced, underutilized education to use. And of course, my life is full of pain, worry, loneliness, and boredom. This series served to distract me from that life for 5-10 minutes a day. But in reflecting on this series I realized I was adding to the confusion surrounding this issue.

This is very simple. I have a line of duty injury. The Army and Guard are required by law to treat it. They’ve not done so fully. The Guard is required by law to give me six months of incapacitation pay. They have not done so. They justify not accomplishing what they are required to do by law by falsely claiming I have not satisfied their requests for paperwork.

The justifications the Army and Guard have used for their actions and inactions are disgusting. Beyond bad form and bad content, their arguments are violations of law and our shared ethics, and are affronts to common sense. While the arguers deserve to be derided for the stupidity and apparent lack of serious concern for the very real harm they’ve caused their arguments reveal, I will never again intentionally confuse the matter with satire or anything else. I am permanently disabled, suffering from major clinical depression and chronic pain, I’m addicted to pain medication, and I’ve taken the first step towards declaring bankruptcy. There’s nothing funny, theoretical, or academic about this.

Post Hoc, Ergo Propter Hoc, also called ‘fallacy of False Cause’

Post Hoc, Ergo Propter Hoc (PHEPH) is a fallacy in which the arguer draws an erroneous conclusion by correlating two events, especially when those events vary together, assuming one event is the cause of the other. Generally correlation is thought to reveal a causal direction, but when correlation is exaggerated and other possible causes are not taken into account, PHEPH has occurred.

Consider the following statements of Rufus Bardus of Macresco, ancient philosopher, physician, and Cassandran fashion consultant taken from his seminal work Braccae Tuae Aperiuntur. In which Bardus simultaneously created a ‘peras of fashion’ and established the foundations of Fabulosusism (worship of Fabulosus, god of hot pants) framed in Anaximander’s concept of apeiron.

Bardus evaluated a patient suffering severe low back pain and neurological symptoms several of his colleagues believed to be associated with a severe lumbar disc herniation. Over the course of a year of inactivity and several rounds of steroids and medications causing weight gain, his patient gained close to 50 pounds. Bardus claimed the following. “You have symptoms because you’re fat.” Implied in this statement from common knowledge of the time, fatness caused an imbalance of vital humors, which caused a variety of pains and illnesses.

This statement is an example of PHEPH in that Bardus improperly causally correlated pain and neurological symptoms with getting fat. When both events ultimately are the result of a third variable: A severe, untreated, broad based lateral lumbar disc herniation effacing multiple spinal nerve roots.

Ignoratio Elenchi, also called ‘irrelevant conclusion’ or ‘missing the point’

Ignoratio elenchi (IE) is a fallacy in which the arguer fails to keep to the matter discussed. Arguing for one matter as though it supported some other matter. This type of statement is fallacious in natural language argument because it is irrelevant to whatever issue is being discussed. There is disagreement among fallacy theorists regarding whether this act needs to be deliberate or not in order for IE to apply. Some (see Hamblin, Fallacies (London, 1970)) consider deliberately confusing the audience a dishonest rhetorical trick, but not an example of IE. For them, IE only occurs when honest confusion in the mind of the would-be refuter is the cause of the irrelevant statement.

Consider the following excerpt from notable metaphysical solipsist, folk phrenologist, and Republican-Negritude epistemologist Peter Elizabeth-Majors’ much lauded work Unconsciousness Unexplained.

To the criticism, “Since May of last year my doctors and I have requested [person X] seek authorization for consultation with a neurosurgeon in response to present symptoms consistent with a neurological syndrome for which emergency surgical intervention is considered necessary, and instead [person X] sought approval for family practice visits and an MRI,” Elizabeth-Majors responded, “A [person of relative lower rank] doesn’t tell [person X, a person of relative higher rank] what to do.”

This statement, whether a product of sincere ignorance or a deliberate attempt to infect the discussion with confusion, is completely irrelevant to the criticism leveled and the subject of discussion.

I wanted to take a moment to thank my readers. We’re up to around 150 visitors a week. They come from all over the US and all over the world - Canada, the Netherlands, Germany, Singapore, Afghanistan, and many others. Whether the stories on this site evoke sympathy and agreement or contempt and deep disagreement, my wife and I are very pleased to know this message is getting out. If the message is getting out it must mean people are at least thinking about this. If they’re thinking about it, maybe they’re talking about it too. And if we get enough people thinking and talking about this matter, maybe we can identify problems if they exist (as my wife and I believe they do).  Maybe together we can do something to improve things for our men and women in uniform.  They deserve it.

Thank you all for your readership.

Best regards,

Jimison

The following is the first post in the educational series, “Introduction to Informal Logic/Fallacy Theory.” Each day I will take statements, making every effort to keep the author’s real identity secret, and treat each statement with concepts from Informal Logic/Fallacy Theory. For my enlisted audience, please print this series as it may be useful to you in “CLEPing” out of a critical thinking course, or make a good primer for the same offered on campus or through correspondence. This material is also covered in Composition courses, Introduction to Logic, and sometimes in Introduction to Philosophy courses. These courses are distribution requirements for most degrees at most accredited universities. This material is also a useful tool in sniffing out statements of questionable form and or validity. Information one can use both in and out of the classroom.

My method is standard. I will introduce the fallacy, describe its defining characteristics, discuss why this sort of statement is fallacious in natural language argument, and provide a real-world example of the fallacy’s use.

Fallacy of Suppressed Evidence

A basic principle of argumentation is that a cogently and honestly stated argument presents all known relevant evidence. When an arguer intentionally omits relevant data to make his position seem stronger or his opponent’s seem weaker, the fallacy of Suppressed Evidence has occurred. This fallacy can be difficult to detect if full data isn’t known or revealed. Suppressing evidence is fallacious because it deliberately focuses attention on information supporting the arguer’s position, but no information that may contradict it. Consider the following example from neo-Modern Social Darwinist Leonardo LeCron Gosol’s work focused on eristic reasoning in ethics and law, Assigning the Victim Blame.

“Your have been ordered to Ft. Knox on 21 Feb. The doctors do not have any additional documentation to validate what you are claiming. I asked you for the documentation last week and on two separate occasions you stated the following:

10 Feb:

“When you receive my medical documents tomorrow, as well, if you wish, read the discussion of
the symptoms I’ve experienced in posts on my site, you will find, as I have already told you, primary medical sources are on my side. The symptoms I experience and their likely cause are in *bold*.”

11 Feb you wrote:

“My wife will have the documents you requested to you later today.”

The reason I asked for the documentation is so I could talk to the doctors at Ft. Knox about your medical condition, as determined by your civilian doctor. To date I still have not received the information. As such, the appointment has now been made and you are directed to make the appointment.”

LeCron Gosol possessed the following quoted statements, but chose to suppress them in attempt to make his premise - his opponent had not complied with requests for various documents after promising to do so, and offered no reasonable excuse for not doing so - appear stronger than it truly is to an outside observer. This premise is part of a larger argument designed to make his opponent appear uncooperative.

“Feb 10

I am facing an uphill struggle. A system biased against those it is meant to help. I need time to prepare, sir. ”

Feb 11

“Prepare medical documents and written opinions of my medical doctors, and prepare a legal strategy with my lawyer. Preparation requires time. Time is what I am asking for.”

“Re: MEB, I really only have one shot at this, sir. If Dr. [Name deleted] or his colleagues screw me again, there isn’t anything, until the laws are changed, that I can do about it. This, sir, is why I need time to prepare and coordinate this with my doctors and my attorney.”

“I do not believe a just outcome is possible working within this system without assistance from those outside the system. Those outside this system need time to prepare, and so do I.”

While committing this fallacy may help LeCron Gosol support his position, that he would need to suppress evidence speaks to the inherent weakness of his position, and to a less-than honest approach in arguing it.

In a recent letter the assistant to the Adjutant General of the Michigan National Guard made the following statements. “I have performed an exhaustive investigation.” “I feel the national guard has gone above and beyond for you.” I’m willing to, as a matter of forensic tradition, accept that he believes what he’s saying. Good will and a charitable rendering of an opponent’s position is standard, although these courtesies have not been reciprocated.

I’m going to share the Guard’s score card as I see it. I’ll list each action they’ve elected to take or each action they’re required by law to take, and briefly describe how they’ve performed.

Exhaustive investigation: An action the Guard elected to take. In it the investigator spoke to me on one occasion by phone and maybe three or four times by email. He asked for no email traffic between various Guard members involved in this case or other documents I may have in my possession that may support my position. He did request medical records, but did so in a manner difficult to respond to - he asked the documents be scanned and emailed to him when it was clear to him my wife and I did not have a scanner readily available to us. I asked for more time to comply with his requests. He ignored me, and used this single act of not complying with his request to establish (in his mind) a pattern of ‘purposely ignoring requests for information.’ He founded the rest of his position on the sworn statements of those who’ve been criticized. He has not yet responded to the documents he has in his possession contradicting the sworn statements of his soldiers.

Medical care for a line of duty injury: Action the Army and the Guard are required by law to take. I have been home since April of last year. I have had an approved Line of Duty investigation since September of last year. To date I have only received authorization for two of three specialists my doctor has been requesting since May of last year. Pain management - epidural steroid injections - and physical therapy were requested together. The reason was to provide some relief from pain caused by inflammation during the physical therapy - to make the physical therapy more effective and less painful. Pain management was authorized in mid November, a full six months after my doctor’s initial request, and a full two months after my Line of Duty investigation was complete. Physical therapy would not be approved until mid December, a full seven months after the initial doctor request, and a full three months after my Line of Duty investigation was complete. I didn’t learn of the approval for physical therapy until mid January of 2008, and when I did find out about the authorization it wasn’t through a member of the Guard (but from Sheila Marolla, Carl Levin’s VA/Military Affairs case manager). Each came separately, ignoring my doctor’s request that these treatments would be most effective if received together.

For authorized treatments, the explanation of what was covered was not very specific. From a casual reading of the authorization document one might believe only the doctor’s visit, and none of his or her treatments were authorized. A problem I brought to the attention of Michigan National Guard Health Services in October of last year. A problem they have still not responded to. My wife and I have since been paying between $200 and $300 a month for prescriptions and canes and back braces, etc., necessary to relieve some of the pain associated with this injury.

This past weekend I learned my doctor’s request to see a neurosurgeon had just been answered. He began making these requests in the treatment plan section of my medical records, through personal conversations by phone with ‘military medical personnel,’ through faxes, mailed records, and through me sharing this need with my unit and with the Guard since May of 2007. That the request has finally been answered is something of a victory I suppose. Though, as implied by the previous paragraph, authorization for a visit with a specialist doesn’t necessarily mean approval for the treatments he recommends. (It is important to note that I have had symptoms of Cauda Equina Syndrome since around June of last year. This is considered a surgical emergency.)

Incapacitation Pay: Action the Guard is required by law to take to supplement income when a Guard soldier is injured on active duty and is unable to work because of that injury. By law Guardsmen are entitled to six (6) months of incapacitation pay. This itself is somewhat problematic, as often injured Guardsmen are incapacitated for far longer than six months. But of the six months of incapacitation pay I’m entitled, I received one (1) month. The reason I was given: a) Health Services had no records beyond the month of May for this injury; b) Health Services did not have ‘sufficient’ documents from specialists speaking to the disabling nature of my injuries. The first statement is patently false. Ms. Marolla received close to 50 pages of mostly printed fax receipts to my unit with medical records and other forms filled out by my doctor speaking to my injuries after the month of May. The second statement is true. However, Health Services had not authorized me to see the specialists whose notes approval of incapacitation pay was conditioned on. Ms. Marolla has explained to me the Guard’s intention of reconsidering my application for the month of September, but not the other four (4) months I’m eligible for. Quite magnanimous.

This result, to date, is the fruit of a year’s struggle. One involving the members at the highest levels of the Michigan National Guard, members of the US Senate, the media, Church leadership, and promises of action in federal court (writs of mandamus, for example). To recap, the Guard’s position is that it has gone above and beyond for me. Of three requests for specialist care the Guard has approved two: 66%. Of the treatments these specialists and my doctor have prescribed, the Guard has specified coverage of zero: 0%. (And my wife and I have paid over $1400 in the last 10 months on prescriptions alone.) Of incapacitation pay the Guard has approved one of the six months for which I’m eligible, but promised to reconsider one additional month. Let’s give that one to them. Two out of six: 33%.

When working as a TA it always pained me to give out poor grades. I accepted late work without penalty, and even the most absurd excuses would satisfy me. I wanted the students to succeed. But in spite of my best efforts, the Guard’s performance doesn’t allow for anything other than a poor grade. .66 + 0 + .33 = .99. .99 / 3 = .33. The Guard has earned a 33%. This is what the Guard considers above and beyond.

But mock report cards aside, a serious problem is revealed. The Guard has not done what it is required by law to do. Because of that, I am permanently disabled, addicted to prescription pain medications, and I am in constant pain. I will never, as long as Feres is in place, achieve anything even resembling justice. In going above and beyond, the Guard destroyed my life and the many lives of those who care for me.

The pushover grader in me is responsible for this addendum. Let’s give the Guard 100% in its investigative efforts to place blame on me - that is to say, within this organization this process did succeed in its purpose. Let’s call it an extra credit assignment. .66 + 0 + .33 + 1.0 = 1.99. 1.99 / 4 = >.5. Shit, that’s still an E. But they can’t say I didn’t try.

Just got in from Fort Knox. You know, the place my wife and I were against traveling to in our bid to get disability without going through military medicine? The same place to which I was opposed to go in my efforts to resist the “treatment” the Army was offering me? (The previous are based on actual statements members of the Guard have made in effort to place blame on me.)

The trip, which was for an MRI - yes, you read that right, I was required to travel 860 miles round trip to get an MRI - went well. And by well I mean the aggravation of my injuries the travel caused only made me piss myself twice, put me in pain at around an 8 on the 10 point scale, and exacerbated my neurological symptoms to such an extent that during the MRI my legs and back couldn’t stop spasming - making the MRI result practically unusable.

The two contract MRI techs kept shaking their heads as my wife and I shared our experiences with them, and what we were in KY for - the MRI. The head tech was especially agitated. He said that in my condition a) I shouldn’t be traveling, but b) if it were absolutely necessary to travel that far to get an MRI (which there was no reason he could think of) the doctor ordering it should have known to prescribe me the most potent muscle relaxers available. Lest the MRI be useless because of the uncontrollable movements of my legs and lower back muscles, and the entire trip be for nothing.

Sarah and I were waiting in Radiology for copies of my MRI. We just don’t trust Army doctors to do the right thing without verifying their opinions against those of civilian radiologists. A sad group gathered waiting for records as the fresh off the boat radiology tech, who literally barely spoke English, bumbled around the clinic with a confused look on his face repeating every word his supervisor said.

One man is in the Minnesota ARNG. He broke his neck during his second tour in Iraq. Army doctors removed a square inch of his C1 vertebrae. They didn’t bother replacing it with anything. The only thing between his C1 and the outside world is some muscle and skin. His arm is paralyzed. He has 16 years with the Guard.  He’s unsure what they’re going to do with him.  He can’t work.  He feels fortunate, however, to have saved up some money from his two tours.

A young lady was there to pick up copies of her MRI to make sure the benign tumors that grow on her spinal cord hadn’t come back. The last time she had one, the doctors removed it and sent her back to work with a script for Ibuprofen.  She hopes she won’t have to go through that again.

A young man was there too to pick up MRI copies for his civilian doctor. He’s an E-4 paying for a civilian doctor out of pocket, because he doesn’t trust how his MEB/PEB is being handled. “Who is your doctor?” I asked. “Doctor Toon” he said. Small world. Toon has had him in MEB limbo for the last 9 months. He originally planned to make the Army a career. Though injured, he can’t wait to get out, regardless of whether he feels he gets the proper disability rating. He hates the Army now, and just wants to be done with them.

What seemed to separate them from me was my willingness to talk about it out loud regardless of who was around. When Army doctors would walk by they would quiet down. Bowing their heads almost. I asked, “Why do you guys quiet down when they walk by?” “They control what happens to us” was the gist of their responses.  “We don’t want to piss them off” was implied.

I wondered why they would be content complaining to me, but not to anyone with power to actually do anything about their complaints. Then a Colon Powell quote that I couldn’t quite remember verbatim at the time came to mind.  I just found.

“The day soldiers stop bringing you their problems is the day you have stopped leading them. They have either lost confidence that you can help them or concluded that you do not care. Either case is a failure of leadership.”

Where are you, GEN Powell, when we need you?  What do we do, GEN, when it’s both?

On Friday COL Soldano’s helpful, polite, sincere, fair-minded, understanding, concerned, almost avuncular facade cracked. Through the cracks I caught of glimpse of the real person behind it. A person not investigating a serious matter unbiased, but a gambler eager for the Great Magnet to deal him a hand he could use (to lay blame at the feet of the victim). On Friday he thought he got it. For a few minutes he had me convinced too.

Then today my wife, though extremely busy with work - work for a company that will rise or fall based on the results of what she does - took time to leaf through the stacks of forms and documents and medical records strewn around our home. Sarah and I believed the truth was in them stacks of paper. Now we know. And now the COL, Ms. Sheila Marolla, and the rest of the world will know too.

Anytime the light of truth rushes in to replace the darkness of lies and intentional confusion there are consequences. Consequences for those keeping the lights off to obscure and conceal the monstrous truth - the Army’s best kept secret. Dragons of negligence and incompetence, calloused and cloy, bellies bursting with the pain of broken patriots, move furtive and safe in the shadows of unknowing to wounded cries of their victims. But who kept the lights off? The COL? Did he know the truth but deny it to protect his organization? Or did subordinates lie to him to protect themselves? What will the consequences be in either case? What does this do to the COL’s claims that I am to blame for the suffering my wife, family, friends and I have endured for the past year? I’d say it destroys it. But I’m sure the Army and the Guard will draw a different conclusion. This difference is a matter of method really. My concern is the truth and to remedy problems with accessing medical care for a line of duty injury, and the Army and the Guard’s is to convince everyone outside looking in that everything is okay.

I took my friend, Jimison, to his physical therapy appointment yesterday.   I had no idea what the therapy session would involve – it’s only therapy, how bad can it be?   At first I was going to stay in the waiting room, but the therapist told me I could stay with him during the session.  She first had him turn over on his side, and started massaging his back near the injury area.   I saw sweat rolling down Jimison’s face as he grabbed onto the edge of the bed.  He couldn’t look at me, he had his eyes closed and I had the distinct impression that he was doing everything in his power not to scream out in pain.  This was a man in excruciating pain, and as his friend, it was hard to watch.  I often had to look away in order to maintain my composure.  The immediate thought I had was “if only the army officials looking after his injury case could be here sitting in my place and seeing this, they would come to their senses and give him the care that he is entitled to.”   She gave Jimison another “massage” which involved putting her elbows into his back.  I guess she knows what she’s doing, I hope.  After the elbow massage, Jimison sat up for a minute.  There were tremors throughout his body – reminiscient of my elderly father who suffers from advanced Parkinson’s, but worse.  A person who can withstand this much pain and still be a devoted husband to Sarah, and a good friend to me has a lot of courage.

The therapist then planted electrodes on his back and started up a machine that was supposed to cause tingling in his back, which at least in theory would give him some very temporary relief from the pain.  She claimed that the tingling sensation would act as a diversion so that his brain wouldn’t be able to process the pain.  A poor substitute for surgery, in my opinion.  Yet, Jimison was looking forward to having a half hour relief from the pain.  What struck me is that the pain is so bad, that even half an hour or even ten minutes relief was worth its weight in gold.  But what about the other 23 ½ hours?   And the rest of the week?   As it turns out, Jimison was in more pain after the therapy session.

Afterwards, we had lunch together.  If it were me, I wouldn’t be able to carry on a conversation after such a session.  I would likely spend the rest of the day in bed.  But it was Valentine’s day, and Jimsion was going to have dinner with his wife, Sarah.  After lunch, he got Sarah a box of chocolates and a card.  I asked him on the way back what his daily experience of pain is like.   He said “moderately severe to severe.”   This has been going on now for a year, and I have seen a capable, intelligent young man, and one of the physically strongest people I have ever met reduced to barely getting around with a cane, and hoping for just a half hour here and a half hour there of relief.  This is not right.  The longer Jimison goes without surgery, the worse the condition becomes, and the less reversible it is.  He is now experiencing numbness and tingling in his arms and legs as the herniated disc continues to press against the spinal cord.  The longer this goes on, the less reversible the condition will become.  Where are you, Uncle Sam?  One of your undying patriots is waiting for your help.

Brian MacPherson

Tonight I received an email from CPT Gunnar Kiersey.  Attached was a letter authorizing treatment for five physical therapy visits at the same physical therapy clinic at which I’ve already received care (as part of my already approved 12 physical therapy visits).  That one I could accept.  The Army is horrible at communicating information.  I guess typing memos and articulating complex ideas is tough when you’re accustomed to communication through grunting and pointing and pitching feces.  The second attachment was less funny.

I’m supposed to travel to Fort Knox, KY, close to 1,000 miles roundtrip from my home, to get an X-ray for an injury for which I already have an MRI (and confirmation from no less than four separate medical professionals that my symptoms correspond perfectly with the results of that MRI).  I am to take a plane, rent a car, and travel from the airport to Fort Knox, approximately 40 miles.  My unit, State Health Services, and the Adjutant General’s Office know that sitting upright, as one does when either driving or sitting in Couch, let alone walking distances or carrying baggage, exacerbate my neurological symptoms.  Symptoms that include those of a humiliating nature like bowel and urinary incontinence, to those of a dangerous nature like losing feeling and motor control in my right leg (the leg I use when driving to press on the gas/brake pedals).

This is standard operating procedure if you’re an asshole.  If you tend not to think of human beings you outrank as persons with feelings and moral/legal standing.  To the Guard and the Army my concerns, inconveniences, and the very real harm and danger this unnecessary trip creates aren’t relevant.  I’m like a roll of toilet paper or a screwdriver or a pack of Whiteout to them.  A commodity to ship from here to there if defective.  Well my friends, the Army and the Guard are in for a rude awakening.  This commodity can harm them and their negligently sadistic way of doing things.  This commodity has a 5 Z-score on the WAIS.  This commodity has a triple degree from a tier one school.  This commodity has friends in high places.  This commodity has already shared his story with the media in front of a live audience.  This commodity has the ear of a senior member of Senate Judiciary Committee, and  a pledge from a popular (with the 17-35 demographic) international broadcast media group and an equally popular international magazine to promote, coordinate, and fund a benefits concert to pay for the medical care the Army and the Guard won’t - and to broadcast/write up a full account, naming names, of my experiences.

I’ve given them full warning.  I’ve given them every opportunity to do the right thing.  I’ve made my intentions to take this as far as I am able to, as of yesterday, even if that means harming them and their recruiting (which, as this media group and magazine are popular with military recruit-aged demographics will happen).  Some people can’t do what’s right without punishment.  Usually really dumb people.  There’s no shortage of dumb people in the Army.  The mistake they made was in thinking (using that term in its loosest possible construal) I’m dumb and impotent like they are.  If it takes a skull crack and abolishment of Feres to realize this error and to make them fly straight, so be it.