The staff report did not mention what I always understood to be the origin of this fallacy.
I’ve used it over and over as an example of how fallacies that “everybody knows” can be perpetuated despite containing no shred of truth.
I always understood the first reference to ostriches burying their heads in the sand to have been made in Roman oratory – I remember it as Cicero in the Senate, but I may have forgotten the actual name and location and filled in those on the hundredth or so telling. I just remember reading that it was supposed to be some august Roman personage using the image of this exotic creature, the ostrich, and its peculiar habit of burying its head in the sand when it was afraid, to make some point in a speech… despite no such behavior every actually occurring… and that with that single reference, based on rumour, mistake, or sheer invention, a seed was planted that grew this tree that’s impossible to chop down. It’s something “everybody knows” that just ain’t so.
That’s always seemed not only a good explanation to me, but a great example. I’d be sad if it weren’t true… but, did the Romans make it to ostrich country? In Cicero’s time? Does this explanation (whose source I just cannot place) hang together, make sense?
The Roman reference usually given is that of Pliny the Elder in Book X of his Naturalis Historia, where he states that ostriches stupidly hide their heads in bushes (not in the sand), thinking that they are thereby completely hidden:
Actually after reading the report, it is very, very ordinary. It really tells us nothing except the author gets some jollies by slipping in some alleged funny asides.
That was one of the earliest staff reports, and we didn’t quite know what they were supposed to be or where we were going. At the beginning, back in 1999, Staff Reports (then called “Mailbag”) were not necessarily intended to be thorough. Amusing filler was sort of the norm. Back in those balmy days, I could churn out Staff Reports by a quick visit to the OED and a couple of other etymology sources.
Over time, things have developed, of course, along a very different line. Jill still posts, but hasn’t been writing Staff Reports for some time, but I can ask her if she’d like to take a stab at it (although I’m reasonably sure her answer will be no.)
And, we’re always looking for people willing to research and write. So, either Cicero or troublemonkey (or anyone else), if you’d like to revise the old ostrich report, that would be great. It might be as simple as adding a paragraph or two, it might be a total revision, either would be fine. Email me if interested.
Hey, it’s in my job description, trying to see to it that there are Special Reports in the pipeline. Anyhow, my oblique attempt has worked: troublemonkey has agreed to do some research and see what’s up.
One Staff Report I would love to see, which Jill would be the ideal person for, would be the connection between HIV and AIDS – with a double-headed function of debunking the Duisberg fallacy and educating about modes of transmission. I cannot count the number of times I’ve seen people advancing conspiracy hysteria on the one hand, and “AIDS is a gay disease” on the other – it’d be nice to have something solid and well documented in one place to point to in refuting them.
