In order to understand what a fallacy is, one must understand what an argument is. Very briefly, an argument consists of one or more premises and one conclusion. A premise is a statement (a sentence that is either true or false) that is offered in support of the claim being made, which is the conclusion (which is also a sentence that is either true or false).
A fallacy is, very generally, an error in reasoning. This differs from a factual error, which is simply being wrong about the facts. To be more specific, a fallacy is an "argument" in which the premises given for the conclusion do not provide the needed degree of support.
=An Ad Hominem is a general category of fallacies in which a claim or argument is rejected on the basis of some irrelevant fact about the author of or the person presenting the claim or argument. Typically, this fallacy involves two steps. First, an attack against the character of person making the claim, her circumstances, or her actions is made (or the character, circumstances, or actions of the person reporting the claim). Second, this attack is taken to be evidence against the claim or argument the person in question is making (or presenting).
Example:
A: "I believe that using contraceptives is morally wrong."
B: "Of course you're a priest."
A: "I have evidence to support my position?"
B: "Like I said, you're a priest, so you have to say that using contraceptives is wrong.
=Ad Hominem Tu Quoque. This fallacy is committed when it is concluded that a person's claim is false because 1) it is inconsistent with something else a person has said or 2) what a person says is inconsistent with her actions.
Example:
A: I think the divorce bill will not solve family problems.
B: But last month you attached your signature to push through that bill. So you are wrong now.
=Appeal to Authority. This fallacy is committed when the person in question is not a legitimate authority on the subject. More formally, if person A is not qualified to make reliable claims in subject S, then the argument will be fallacious.
Example:
A: "I played the lottery today and I know I am going to win something."
B: "What did you do, rig the outcome?"
A: "No, silly. I called my Super Psychic Buddy at the 1-900-MindPower number. After consulting his magic Cebu Tarot deck, he told me my lucky numbers."
B: "And you believed him?"
A: "Certainly, he is a certified Californian Master-Mind Psychic. That is why I believe what he has to say. I mean, like, who else would know what my lucky numbers are?"
=Appeal to Belief. This line of "reasoning" is fallacious because the fact that many people believe a claim does not, in general, serve as evidence that the claim is true.
Example:
Smoking is not that bad. In fact, it will prove your musculinity.
=Appeal to Common Practice. The basic idea behind the fallacy is that the fact that most people do X is used as "evidence" to support the action or practice. It is a fallacy because the mere fact that most people do something does not make it correct, moral, justified, or reasonable.
Example:
I know cheating is wrong but everyone does it, so it is okay.
= Appeal to Consequences of a Belief. This line of "reasoning" is fallacious because the consequences of a belief have no bearing on whether the belief is true or false.
Example:
God must exist! If God did not exist, then all basis for morality would be lost and the world would be a horrible place!
=Appeal to Emotion. This fallacy is committed when someone manipulates peoples' emotions in order to get them to accept a claim as being true. More formally, this sort of "reasoning" involves the substitution of various means of producing strong emotions in place of evidence for a claim. If the favorable emotions associated with X influence the person to accept X as true because they "feel good about X," then he has fallen prey to the fallacy.
Example:
The new skin whitening soap. It will make your skin white, shiny and soft. Do not worry anymore form blackiness. People will surely envy you.
=Appeal to Fear. This line of "reasoning" is fallacious because creating fear in people does not constitute evidence for a claim.
Example:
You must believe that God exists. After all, if you do not accept the existence of God, then you will face the horrors of hell.
=Appeal to Flattery. The basic idea behind this fallacy is that flattery is presented in the place of evidence for accepting a claim. this sort of "reasoning" is fallacious because flattery is not, in fact, evidence for a claim.
Example:
what a great topic! I will base my essay on that. Provided that you allow me a little extra time past the deadline to work on it.
=Appeal to Novelty. This sort of "reasoning" is fallacious because the novelty or newness of something does not automatically make it correct or better than something older.
Example:
A Nokia 5000. It is better because it is new.
=Appeal to Pity. This line of "reasoning" is fallacious because pity does not serve as evidence for a claim.
Example:
I'm positive that my work will meet your requirements. I really need the job since my grandmother is sick.
=Appeal to Popularity. The basic idea is that a claim is accepted as being true simply because most people are favorably inclined towards the claim. More formally, the fact that most people have favorable emotions associated with the claim is substituted in place of actual evidence for the claim. A person falls prey to this fallacy if he accepts a claim as being true simply because most other people approve of the claim.
Example:
Most people really like the new smoke belching laws. I was sort of suspicious of them, but I guess if most people like them, then they must be okay.
=Appeal to Ridicule. This sort of "reasoning" is fallacious because mocking a claim does not show that it is false.
Example:
Sure my worthy opponent claims that we should lower tuition, but it is just illogical.
=Appeal to Spite. is a fallacy in which spite is substituted for evidence when an "argument" is made against a claim.
Example:
I think Ana did a great job this year so I'll nominate her. But she did not give me a birthday gift, so I'll nominate Kate instead.
=Appeal to Tradition. is a fallacy that occurs when it is assumed that something is better or correct simply because it is older, traditional, or "always has been done."
Example:
Sure I believe in God. People have believed in God for thousands of years so it seems clear that God must exist. After all, why else would the belief last so long
=The Bandwagon is a fallacy in which a threat of rejection by one's peers (or peer pressure) is substituted for evidence in an "argument."
Example:
A:I like classical music and I think it is of higher quality than most modern music.
B:Come on. That is for oldies' stuff. Metal rock rules!
A:Well, I don't really like it that much. Metal rock is much better.
=Begging the Question is a fallacy in which the premises include the claim that the conclusion is true or (directly or indirectly) assume that the conclusion is true.
Example:
I believe that God exist because the Bible says so.
=Burden of Proof is a fallacy in which the burden of proof is placed on the wrong side. Another version occurs when a lack of evidence for side A is taken to be evidence for side B in cases in which the burden of proof actually rests on side B.
Example:
You cannot prove that God does not exist, so He does.
=A Circumstantial ad Hominem is a fallacy in which one attempts to attack a claim by asserting that the person making the claim is making it simply out of self interest. In some cases, this fallacy involves substituting an attack on a person's circumstances (such as the person's religion, political affiliation, ethnic background, etc.).
Example:
He says that abortion is morally wrong, but that is false, since he is only saying it because he is a priest.
=The fallacy of Composition is committed when a conclusion is drawn about a whole based on the features of its constituents when, in fact, no justification provided for the inference.
Example:
Birds do fly. Ostrich cannot fly. Therefore, it is not a bird.
=The fallacy of Division is committed when a person infers that what is true of a whole must also be true of its constituents and justification for that inference is not provided.
Example:
The grass is green. Therefore the atoms made up it is green.
=False Dilemma. This line of "reasoning" is fallacious because if both claims could be false, then it cannot be inferred that one is true because the other is false.
Example:
Garry is dead or he is alive.
He is not dead.
Therefore he is alive.
=A Genetic Fallacy is a line of "reasoning" in which a perceived defect in the origin of a claim or thing is taken to be evidence that discredits the claim or thing itself. It is also a line of reasoning in which the origin of a claim or thing is taken to be evidence for the claim or thing.
Example:
I was brought up to believe in God, and my parents told me God exists, so He must.
=Hasty Generalization. This fallacy is committed when a person draws a conclusion about a population based on a sample that is not large enough.
Example:
While Jim riding home he was yelled by two people, "Shut up!" He saw that car driven by the two is a Toyota. Therefore he thinks that Toyota drivers are jerks.
=Middle Ground. This fallacy is committed when it is assumed that the middle position between two extremes must be correct simply because it is the middle position.
Example:
Some people claim that God is all powerful, all knowing, and all good. Other people claim that God does not exist at all. Now, it seems reasonable to accept a position somewhere in the middle. So, it is likely that God exists, but that he is only very powerful, very knowing, and very good. That seems right to me.
=A personal attack is committed when a person substitutes abusive remarks for evidence when attacking another person's claim or claims. This line of "reasoning" is fallacious because the attack is directed at the person making the claim and not the claim itself. The truth value of a claim is independent of the person making the claim. After all, no matter how repugnant an individual might be, he or she can still make true claims.
Example:
That claim cannot be true. Kurt believe on it, and we know how expert he is.
=Poisoning the Well. This sort of "reasoning" involves trying to discredit what a person might later claim by presenting unfavorable information (be it true or false) about the person.
Example:
Don't listen to her, she is a jerk.
=The Post Hoc fallacy derives its name from the Latin phrase "Post hoc, ergo propter hoc." This has been traditionally interpreted as "After this, therefore because of this." This fallacy is committed when it is concluded that one event causes another simply because the proposed cause occurred before the proposed effect. More formally, the fallacy involves concluding that A causes or caused B because A occurs before B and there is not sufficient evidence to actually warrant such a claim.
Example:
The picture on Harry's old TV set goes out of focus. Harry goes over and strikes the TV soundly on the side and the picture goes back into focus. Harry tells his friend that hitting the TV fixed it.
=A Red Herring is a fallacy in which an irrelevant topic is presented in order to divert attention from the original issue. The basic idea is to "win" an argument by leading attention away from the argument and to another topic.
Example:
We admit that this measure is popular. But we also urge you to note that there are so many bond issues on this ballot that the whole thing is getting ridiculous.
=The Slippery Slope is a fallacy in which a person asserts that some event must inevitably follow from another without any argument for the inevitability of the event in question. In most cases, there are a series of steps or gradations between one event and the one in question and no reason is given as to why the intervening steps or gradations will simply be bypassed.
Example:
You can never give anyone a break. If you do, they'll walk all over you.
=Two Wrongs Make a Right is a fallacy in which a person "justifies" an action against a person by asserting that the person would do the same thing to him/her, when the action is not necessary to prevent B from doing X to A.
Example:
After leaving a store, Jack notices that she has underpaid by Php10. She decides not to return the money to the store because if she had overpaid, they would not have returned the money.
A fallacy is, very generally, an error in reasoning. This differs from a factual error, which is simply being wrong about the facts. To be more specific, a fallacy is an "argument" in which the premises given for the conclusion do not provide the needed degree of support.
=An Ad Hominem is a general category of fallacies in which a claim or argument is rejected on the basis of some irrelevant fact about the author of or the person presenting the claim or argument. Typically, this fallacy involves two steps. First, an attack against the character of person making the claim, her circumstances, or her actions is made (or the character, circumstances, or actions of the person reporting the claim). Second, this attack is taken to be evidence against the claim or argument the person in question is making (or presenting).
Example:
A: "I believe that using contraceptives is morally wrong."
B: "Of course you're a priest."
A: "I have evidence to support my position?"
B: "Like I said, you're a priest, so you have to say that using contraceptives is wrong.
=Ad Hominem Tu Quoque. This fallacy is committed when it is concluded that a person's claim is false because 1) it is inconsistent with something else a person has said or 2) what a person says is inconsistent with her actions.
Example:
A: I think the divorce bill will not solve family problems.
B: But last month you attached your signature to push through that bill. So you are wrong now.
=Appeal to Authority. This fallacy is committed when the person in question is not a legitimate authority on the subject. More formally, if person A is not qualified to make reliable claims in subject S, then the argument will be fallacious.
Example:
A: "I played the lottery today and I know I am going to win something."
B: "What did you do, rig the outcome?"
A: "No, silly. I called my Super Psychic Buddy at the 1-900-MindPower number. After consulting his magic Cebu Tarot deck, he told me my lucky numbers."
B: "And you believed him?"
A: "Certainly, he is a certified Californian Master-Mind Psychic. That is why I believe what he has to say. I mean, like, who else would know what my lucky numbers are?"
=Appeal to Belief. This line of "reasoning" is fallacious because the fact that many people believe a claim does not, in general, serve as evidence that the claim is true.
Example:
Smoking is not that bad. In fact, it will prove your musculinity.
=Appeal to Common Practice. The basic idea behind the fallacy is that the fact that most people do X is used as "evidence" to support the action or practice. It is a fallacy because the mere fact that most people do something does not make it correct, moral, justified, or reasonable.
Example:
I know cheating is wrong but everyone does it, so it is okay.
= Appeal to Consequences of a Belief. This line of "reasoning" is fallacious because the consequences of a belief have no bearing on whether the belief is true or false.
Example:
God must exist! If God did not exist, then all basis for morality would be lost and the world would be a horrible place!
=Appeal to Emotion. This fallacy is committed when someone manipulates peoples' emotions in order to get them to accept a claim as being true. More formally, this sort of "reasoning" involves the substitution of various means of producing strong emotions in place of evidence for a claim. If the favorable emotions associated with X influence the person to accept X as true because they "feel good about X," then he has fallen prey to the fallacy.
Example:
The new skin whitening soap. It will make your skin white, shiny and soft. Do not worry anymore form blackiness. People will surely envy you.
=Appeal to Fear. This line of "reasoning" is fallacious because creating fear in people does not constitute evidence for a claim.
Example:
You must believe that God exists. After all, if you do not accept the existence of God, then you will face the horrors of hell.
=Appeal to Flattery. The basic idea behind this fallacy is that flattery is presented in the place of evidence for accepting a claim. this sort of "reasoning" is fallacious because flattery is not, in fact, evidence for a claim.
Example:
what a great topic! I will base my essay on that. Provided that you allow me a little extra time past the deadline to work on it.
=Appeal to Novelty. This sort of "reasoning" is fallacious because the novelty or newness of something does not automatically make it correct or better than something older.
Example:
A Nokia 5000. It is better because it is new.
=Appeal to Pity. This line of "reasoning" is fallacious because pity does not serve as evidence for a claim.
Example:
I'm positive that my work will meet your requirements. I really need the job since my grandmother is sick.
=Appeal to Popularity. The basic idea is that a claim is accepted as being true simply because most people are favorably inclined towards the claim. More formally, the fact that most people have favorable emotions associated with the claim is substituted in place of actual evidence for the claim. A person falls prey to this fallacy if he accepts a claim as being true simply because most other people approve of the claim.
Example:
Most people really like the new smoke belching laws. I was sort of suspicious of them, but I guess if most people like them, then they must be okay.
=Appeal to Ridicule. This sort of "reasoning" is fallacious because mocking a claim does not show that it is false.
Example:
Sure my worthy opponent claims that we should lower tuition, but it is just illogical.
=Appeal to Spite. is a fallacy in which spite is substituted for evidence when an "argument" is made against a claim.
Example:
I think Ana did a great job this year so I'll nominate her. But she did not give me a birthday gift, so I'll nominate Kate instead.
=Appeal to Tradition. is a fallacy that occurs when it is assumed that something is better or correct simply because it is older, traditional, or "always has been done."
Example:
Sure I believe in God. People have believed in God for thousands of years so it seems clear that God must exist. After all, why else would the belief last so long
=The Bandwagon is a fallacy in which a threat of rejection by one's peers (or peer pressure) is substituted for evidence in an "argument."
Example:
A:I like classical music and I think it is of higher quality than most modern music.
B:Come on. That is for oldies' stuff. Metal rock rules!
A:Well, I don't really like it that much. Metal rock is much better.
=Begging the Question is a fallacy in which the premises include the claim that the conclusion is true or (directly or indirectly) assume that the conclusion is true.
Example:
I believe that God exist because the Bible says so.
=Burden of Proof is a fallacy in which the burden of proof is placed on the wrong side. Another version occurs when a lack of evidence for side A is taken to be evidence for side B in cases in which the burden of proof actually rests on side B.
Example:
You cannot prove that God does not exist, so He does.
=A Circumstantial ad Hominem is a fallacy in which one attempts to attack a claim by asserting that the person making the claim is making it simply out of self interest. In some cases, this fallacy involves substituting an attack on a person's circumstances (such as the person's religion, political affiliation, ethnic background, etc.).
Example:
He says that abortion is morally wrong, but that is false, since he is only saying it because he is a priest.
=The fallacy of Composition is committed when a conclusion is drawn about a whole based on the features of its constituents when, in fact, no justification provided for the inference.
Example:
Birds do fly. Ostrich cannot fly. Therefore, it is not a bird.
=The fallacy of Division is committed when a person infers that what is true of a whole must also be true of its constituents and justification for that inference is not provided.
Example:
The grass is green. Therefore the atoms made up it is green.
=False Dilemma. This line of "reasoning" is fallacious because if both claims could be false, then it cannot be inferred that one is true because the other is false.
Example:
Garry is dead or he is alive.
He is not dead.
Therefore he is alive.
=A Genetic Fallacy is a line of "reasoning" in which a perceived defect in the origin of a claim or thing is taken to be evidence that discredits the claim or thing itself. It is also a line of reasoning in which the origin of a claim or thing is taken to be evidence for the claim or thing.
Example:
I was brought up to believe in God, and my parents told me God exists, so He must.
=Hasty Generalization. This fallacy is committed when a person draws a conclusion about a population based on a sample that is not large enough.
Example:
While Jim riding home he was yelled by two people, "Shut up!" He saw that car driven by the two is a Toyota. Therefore he thinks that Toyota drivers are jerks.
=Middle Ground. This fallacy is committed when it is assumed that the middle position between two extremes must be correct simply because it is the middle position.
Example:
Some people claim that God is all powerful, all knowing, and all good. Other people claim that God does not exist at all. Now, it seems reasonable to accept a position somewhere in the middle. So, it is likely that God exists, but that he is only very powerful, very knowing, and very good. That seems right to me.
=A personal attack is committed when a person substitutes abusive remarks for evidence when attacking another person's claim or claims. This line of "reasoning" is fallacious because the attack is directed at the person making the claim and not the claim itself. The truth value of a claim is independent of the person making the claim. After all, no matter how repugnant an individual might be, he or she can still make true claims.
Example:
That claim cannot be true. Kurt believe on it, and we know how expert he is.
=Poisoning the Well. This sort of "reasoning" involves trying to discredit what a person might later claim by presenting unfavorable information (be it true or false) about the person.
Example:
Don't listen to her, she is a jerk.
=The Post Hoc fallacy derives its name from the Latin phrase "Post hoc, ergo propter hoc." This has been traditionally interpreted as "After this, therefore because of this." This fallacy is committed when it is concluded that one event causes another simply because the proposed cause occurred before the proposed effect. More formally, the fallacy involves concluding that A causes or caused B because A occurs before B and there is not sufficient evidence to actually warrant such a claim.
Example:
The picture on Harry's old TV set goes out of focus. Harry goes over and strikes the TV soundly on the side and the picture goes back into focus. Harry tells his friend that hitting the TV fixed it.
=A Red Herring is a fallacy in which an irrelevant topic is presented in order to divert attention from the original issue. The basic idea is to "win" an argument by leading attention away from the argument and to another topic.
Example:
We admit that this measure is popular. But we also urge you to note that there are so many bond issues on this ballot that the whole thing is getting ridiculous.
=The Slippery Slope is a fallacy in which a person asserts that some event must inevitably follow from another without any argument for the inevitability of the event in question. In most cases, there are a series of steps or gradations between one event and the one in question and no reason is given as to why the intervening steps or gradations will simply be bypassed.
Example:
You can never give anyone a break. If you do, they'll walk all over you.
=Two Wrongs Make a Right is a fallacy in which a person "justifies" an action against a person by asserting that the person would do the same thing to him/her, when the action is not necessary to prevent B from doing X to A.
Example:
After leaving a store, Jack notices that she has underpaid by Php10. She decides not to return the money to the store because if she had overpaid, they would not have returned the money.
No comments:
Post a Comment