Yeah, I can’t help but think that in many cases there is no implied inference that the alien especially desires the woman, but rather that the reader is especially affected by the fact that the abductee just happens to be an attractive woman. (King Kong would be an exception.) It’s the same reason that we rarely if ever see the alien carrying a cow instead; not because of its preferences, but because we wouldn’t be especially apprehensive about the cow’s fate.
If there’s a bias here, it’s one generated by the desire to tell interesting stories. Projection happens, but I don’t find this example terribly compelling.
I don’t think the inference is necessary, really; it’s fairly explicit that the scenario in which the comment is relevant is one in which the Alien Monster selected the Damsel for some lovin’. A competent writer, given only that cover art as the basis for their film, could get around that. The fact that the story is so frequently told incompetently is what makes it an unfortunately apt example for a much subtler and more insidious fallacy.
As a more contraversial, if slightly less ovious example, is the Christian condemning an Athiest to Hell. Their universe does not include a scenario in which there is any other result in store for someone who disbelieves, even without any objective basis for their claim. Besides Dante Aliegeri, but results have to be independently verifiable, after all.
Your example does not seem to depict a mind projection fallacy. You might contend that the Christian doesn’t have a basis for his assertion, but he doesn’t seem to be confusing the map with the territory.
The Christian in your example isn’t projecting ter mind into the atheist’s mind. Te is, OTOH, if te says, “You must hate God,” or “Why are you so pessimistic?”
Yeah, I can’t help but think that in many cases there is no implied inference that the alien especially desires the woman, but rather that the reader is especially affected by the fact that the abductee just happens to be an attractive woman. (King Kong would be an exception.) It’s the same reason that we rarely if ever see the alien carrying a cow instead; not because of its preferences, but because we wouldn’t be especially apprehensive about the cow’s fate.
If there’s a bias here, it’s one generated by the desire to tell interesting stories. Projection happens, but I don’t find this example terribly compelling.
(Five years on, but whatever)
I don’t think the inference is necessary, really; it’s fairly explicit that the scenario in which the comment is relevant is one in which the Alien Monster selected the Damsel for some lovin’. A competent writer, given only that cover art as the basis for their film, could get around that. The fact that the story is so frequently told incompetently is what makes it an unfortunately apt example for a much subtler and more insidious fallacy.
As a more contraversial, if slightly less ovious example, is the Christian condemning an Athiest to Hell. Their universe does not include a scenario in which there is any other result in store for someone who disbelieves, even without any objective basis for their claim. Besides Dante Aliegeri, but results have to be independently verifiable, after all.
Your example does not seem to depict a mind projection fallacy. You might contend that the Christian doesn’t have a basis for his assertion, but he doesn’t seem to be confusing the map with the territory.
The Christian in your example isn’t projecting ter mind into the atheist’s mind. Te is, OTOH, if te says, “You must hate God,” or “Why are you so pessimistic?”