Fallacy

17 Impressing by Large Nutnbers: "get on the band wagon"
Mere numbers constitute a sort of pseudo-authority. Sometimes a speaker will bolster his position by pointing out that there are many who hold his belief, buy the brand he is selling, or support the candidate he favors. Though it is pleasant to be in step, to conform, to go along, to ride a band wagon, truth is not always democratic. Even unanimity is not infallible.
The authority of mere numbers commonly amounts to no more than mass suggestion or unquestioning acceptance of tradition. Obviously, what "everybody knows" is not necessarily true, for once "everybody" knew that the earth was flat, that monarchs ruled by divine right, that disease was caused by evil spirits, that slavery was necessary. Informed support of democracy today does not involve the conviction that the majority is always right. Perhaps, while no system as such will guarantee wise government, democracy at least has the advantage of allowing citizens to "kick the rascals out."
Of course, everything else being equal, large numbers do often have a wisdom and authority. We saw that an expert is qualified by being recognized by those familiar with the field, and the more of these the more qualified the expert appears to be. Here it is sensible to be impressed by the numbers of other experts who hold an opinion. Even in matters not commonly thought a field for expertise, people are justified in admitting numbers to help form their opinion wherever those numbers can evaluate the facts and arrive at a reasoned judgment.
EXAMPLE COMMENT
An editorial presents this argument: "All the world knows that whenever people are free to choose between the life they have experienced under Communist rule and the life offered by free institutions, then great numbers leave Communism, even at high personal cost. Over a million refugees have fled Eastern Germany to become displaced persons in Western Germany, while the movement from Western to Eastern Germany remains negligible. When 75,000 Chinese and North Korean prisoners of war were given the choice of returning to their homes or facing the uncertainties of a life in exile in South Korea or Formosa, 22,000 chose separation from their families and native land. Regardless of whether one looks at Indochina or Hungary or the other Communist satellites, the story remains always the same: streams of exiles and the merest trickle of those seeking repatriation. And let us note that those leaving Communism have lived under it." Telling argument here. Individuals who have lived under Communism are rather like experts at such a life. Moreover, in matters of experience which intimately concerns them, ordinary people are in a position to judge. Granting this, the numbers are impressive.
Salesman Peter, representing a perfume manufacturer, urges a prospective customer, "Fifty thousand women can't be wrong." The world presents, unfortunately, a daily specta-} cle of tens of millions of individuals holding wrong beliefs and ^consequently following courses disastrous to their social and in-f dividual welfare.
A noted philosopher explains in an interview, "Eminent minds have come to the conclusion that in our civilized world the evil in man prevails over the good. As Hobbes put it, 'The life of man is solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short.' If I am accused of pessimism, all I can say is that I have lots of company and famous company, too." That many philosophers have become disillusioned, including eminent men among them, is no guarantee that such an interpretation of life is adequate or even meaningful. Hobbes, incidentally, was talking about the conditions of life in a putative "state of nature" before the benefits of government. Hence the reference to Hobbes involves quoting out of context (see p. 88).
A housewife to her husband: "Yes, I have heard about the fund raising campaign for the new recreation center. Why, half the social lights of town have endorsed the idea. A look at those endorsements convinced me that we should support it too." There is both a rational and an irrational possibility in this common situation. The good housewife may be reasoning, "These people would endorse only sound ideas. They endorse this idea. Therefore, this idea is sound." In this case, she is adopting the idea she regards as supported by the favorable judgment of reputable people who, she presumes, have enquired into its merits. On the other hand, she may be swayed by the prestige of prominent names; she may be adopting the idea because it comes from sources that she considers beyond question. If so, she is a casualty of the bandwagon technique.

EXAMPLE	COMMENT
An editorial presents this argument: "All the world knows that whenever people are free to choose between the life they have experienced under Communist rule and the life offered by free institutions, then great numbers leave Communism, even at high personal cost. Over a million refugees have fled Eastern Germany to become displaced persons in Western Germany, while the movement from Western to Eastern Germany remains negligible. When 75,000 Chinese and North Korean prisoners of war were given the choice of returning to their homes or facing the uncertainties of a life in exile in South Korea or Formosa, 22,000 chose separation from their families and native land. Regardless of whether one looks at Indochina or Hungary or the other Communist satellites, the story remains always the same: streams of exiles and the merest trickle of those seeking repatriation. And let us note that those leaving Communism have lived under it."	Telling argument here. Individuals who have lived under Communism are rather like experts at such a life. Moreover, in matters of experience which intimately concerns them, ordinary people are in a position to judge. Granting this, the numbers are impressive.
Salesman Peter, representing a perfume manufacturer, urges a prospective customer, "Fifty thousand women can't be wrong."	The world presents, unfortunately, a daily specta-} cle of tens of millions of individuals holding wrong beliefs and ^consequently following courses disastrous to their social and in-f dividual welfare.
A noted philosopher explains in an interview, "Eminent minds have come to the conclusion that in our civilized world the evil in man prevails over the good. As Hobbes put it, 'The life of man is solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short.' If I am accused of pessimism, all I can say is that I have lots of company and famous company, too."	That many philosophers have become disillusioned, including eminent men among them, is no guarantee that such an interpretation of life is adequate or even meaningful. Hobbes, incidentally, was talking about the conditions of life in a putative "state of nature" before the benefits of government. Hence the reference to Hobbes involves quoting out of context (see p. 88).
A housewife to her husband: "Yes, I have heard about the fund raising campaign for the new recreation center. Why, half the social lights of town have endorsed the idea. A look at those endorsements convinced me that we should support it too."	There is both a rational and an irrational possibility in this common situation. The good housewife may be reasoning, "These people would endorse only sound ideas. They endorse this idea. Therefore, this idea is sound." In this case, she is adopting the idea she regards as supported by the favorable judgment of reputable people who, she presumes, have enquired into its merits. On the other hand, she may be swayed by the prestige of prominent names; she may be adopting the idea because it comes from sources that she considers beyond question. If so, she is a casualty of the bandwagon technique.