A proof surrogate is an expression that suggests there is evidence to support one's claim without actually providing any evidence to support it. Thus it can influence us to assume that one's view is based on good reasons without having evaluated those reasons for ourselves. In other words, it encourages us to commit the fallacy, "So-and-so said there was evidence for X, therefore X is true."
Example #1:
In this debate clip, Obama argues that Romney cannot decrease the national deficit and lower tax rates (and increase military spending) without burdening the middle class. He asserts that his view has been established by "independent studies" by "the economists who have looked at this." However, he does not actually provide any of the evidence from these studies for us to evaluate.
Example #1:
In this debate clip, Obama argues that Romney cannot decrease the national deficit and lower tax rates (and increase military spending) without burdening the middle class. He asserts that his view has been established by "independent studies" by "the economists who have looked at this." However, he does not actually provide any of the evidence from these studies for us to evaluate.
Example #2:
Romney uses the same rhetorical device later when he says there are "six studies" that dispute one of Obama's claims, though he also fails to provide that evidence for us to evaluate.