Lesson 7

Lesson 7 : 

Are There Any Fallacies in the Reasoning? Lesson 7

What is a Fallacy? : 

What is a Fallacy? A faulty argument that at first appears to be correct. A trick an author/speaker might use while trying to convince you to accept their faulty conclusion. WARNING! Don’t develop an “I gotcha” attitude! The purpose of identifying fallacies is to help all parties sort out stronger arguments from weaker arguments.

Types of Fallacies : 

Types of Fallacies Formal Fallacy Mistaken reasoning in which the form of the argument itself is invalid. “Some high school dropouts are men. No doctors are high school dropouts. There, no doctors are men.”

Types of Fallacies : 

Types of Fallacies Informal Fallacy Mistaken reasoning that occurs when an argument is emotionally persuasive but logically incorrect. Sound good and appeals to emotions, but are not true.

Examples of Fallacies : 

Examples of Fallacies

Ad Hominem Fallacy : 

Ad Hominem Fallacy An attack, or an insult, on the person, rather than directly addressing the person’s argument. Can take two forms: Abusive: Directly attacking the person’s character (pg. 71). Circumstantial: We dismiss someone’s argument or accuse them of hypocrisy because of their circumstances.

Ad Hominem Fallacy : 

Ad Hominem Fallacy “A father catches his son smoking and tells him that “you shouldn’t be smoking. It’s not good for your health”. Then the son replies, “Look who’s talking. You smoke at least a pack a day” The son has dismissed his father’s argument because of the circumstances of his father. The son has ignored the validity of his father’s argument.

The Slippery Slope Fallacy : 

The Slippery Slope Fallacy Making the assumption that a proposed step will set off an uncontrollable chain of undesirable events, when procedures exist to prevent such a chain of events. Assumes that if certain actions are allowed than all actions of that type will soon be permissible. We commit the slippery slope fallacy when the evidence does not support this predicted outcome.

The Slippery Slope Fallacy : 

The Slippery Slope Fallacy Example 1: “You should never give in to your child. If you do, soon she will have you wrapped around her little finger. You need to stay in control.” Example 2: “If we allow any form of human cloning, then before we know it there will be armies of clones taking over our jobs.”

The Slippery Slope Fallacy : 

Slippery slope argument is not always a fallacy! If the evidence exists to back up the slippery slope argument it is not a fallacy. Sometimes the fear that a particular action or allowance will start us/you down a dangerous slippery slope is valid. To avoid the slippery slope fallacy we should carefully carry out our research and familiarize ourselves with the likely outcomes of different actions. Avoid the tendency to exaggerate. The Slippery Slope Fallacy

The Perfect Solution Fallacy : 

The Perfect Solution Fallacy Assumes that because part of a problem would remain after the solution is tried, the solution should not be applied. All or nothing fallacy. If we wait for the “perfect solution”, we would often find ourselves stuck. Examples: Seat belts, Home/Business security systems (video example).

Equivocation Fallacy : 

Equivocation Fallacy A key word/phrase is used with two or more meanings in an argument. Therefore the argument fails to make sense once the shifts in meaning are recognized. Example: Ronda: Curtis is not a real man. He looked scared to death when that drunk at the bar threatened to punch him. Ellen: If he’s not a real man, how do you account for those incredibly bulging biceps.

Equivocation Fallacy : 

Equivocation Fallacy Most likely to occur when the meaning of a key term is ambiguous. Example: Carl: Terminally ill patients have a right to decide how and when they want to die. Juan: That’s not true. There is no right to euthanasia in the U.S. law. We should clearly define any ambiguous term or phrase before proceeding with an argument/discussion. Try to avoid using relative terms in different contexts within the same argument.

Appeal to Popularity (Ad Populum) : 

Appeal to Popularity (Ad Populum) An attempt to justify a claim by appealing to sentiments that large groups of people have in common. Falsely assumes that anything favored by a large group is desirable. It is an appeal to popular opinion to gain support for our conclusion. The bandwagon approach: “Everyone else is doing it” or “everyone else believes it”.

Appeal to Popularity (Ad Populum) : 

Appeal to Popularity (Ad Populum) Example: “The ban on assault weapons should be extended. A recent Gallup Poll found that 68% of Americans support having a ban on assault weapons.” As critical thinkers we need to remember that a position or conclusion is not necessarily right because it is popular. Every position or conclusion must be critically examined.

Appeal To Questionable Authority : 

Appeal To Questionable Authority Supporting a conclusion by citing an authority who lacks special expertise on the issue at hand. We look to an authority in a field other than that under investigation. Example: “My preacher says that genetic engineering is not safe. Therefore, all experimentation in this field should be stopped”

Appeal To Questionable Authority : 

Appeal To Questionable Authority The “halo effect”: Distinguished titles often serve to reinforce the mistaken idea that someone who is an expert in one field will also be an expert in another. We avoid this fallacy by: Checking out an “expert’s” credentials in the field before using his/her testimony as authoritative.

Appeals To Emotion : 

Appeals To Emotion The use of emotionally charged language (or images) to distract readers/listeners from relevant reasons and evidence. Common emotions that are appealed to are: fear, hope, patriotism, pity, and sympathy. Done by those who hope that our emotional reactions will cause us to agree with their conclusion. Emotional reactions should not be relevant.

Straw Man Fallacy : 

Straw Man Fallacy Occurs when we distort our opponent’s view so that it is easy to attack; thus we attack a point of view that does not exist. When an opponent’s argument is distorted or misrepresented in order to make it easier to refute. How do we avoid this? Look at the argument in question as it was originally presented. Has the argument been reworded or oversimplified to the point of misrepresentation? Have key parts of the original argument been omitted?

Either Or (False Dilemma) : 

Either Or (False Dilemma) Assumes that only two alternatives are possible when there are really more than two possible alternatives. Responses to complex issues are reduced to an either/or choice. Example:“America – love it or leave it! If you don’t like U.S. policy, then move somewhere else.”

Either Or (False Dilemma) : 

Either Or (False Dilemma) Poor critical thinking skills and the tendency to the see the world in black and white make it more likely that we’ll fall into this fallacy. Habitual use of this fallacy restricts our ability to come up with creative solutions to problems. Overcoming personal setbacks requires that we use our critical thinking skills to come up with a way of overcoming our problems rather than getting stuck in erroneous thinking.

Either Or (False Dilemma) : 

Either Or (False Dilemma) How do we avoid this fallacy? Watch out for either/or questions that put you on the spot. If neither alternative is acceptable, it is best to leave the response blank or check “I don’t know”.

Wishful Thinking : 

Wishful Thinking Making the faulty assumption that because we wish X were true (or false), then X is indeed true (or false). Example: “I can’t wait for summer vacation time, so I can get all those books read that I’ve put off reading during the school year.” We avoid this fallacy by staying focused on the way things really are.

Explaining by Naming : 

Explaining by Naming Falsely assuming that because you have provided a name for some event or behavior, you have also adequately explained the event or behavior. Example: people commit violent acts because they are evil. The naming prevents us from understanding common causes of violent acts (not excuses). Watch out for this fallacy when someone claims they have discovered a new cause for a behavior. Many times they are just re-labeling or re-naming the behavior.

Hasty Generalizations : 

Hasty Generalizations The use of vague emotionally appealing virtue words that dispose us to approve something without closely examining the reasons. Making assumptions about a whole group or range of cases based on a sample that is inadequate. Common example of this is “Stereotypes”.

Hasty Generalizations : 

Hasty Generalizations How do we avoid this fallacy? Ask ourselves what kind of sample is being used. Are we relying on the opinions or experiences of just a few people? Are we relying upon our own experience? Do we need more evidence? Avoid sweeping conclusions.

Red Herring Fallacy : 

Red Herring Fallacy Occurs when a response is directed toward a conclusion that is different from that proposed by the original argument. Example: “I don’t see why you get so upset about my driving after I have a few drinks. It’s not such a big deal. Look at all the accidents that are caused by people talking on their cell phones while driving”

Red Herring Fallacy : 

Red Herring Fallacy Another example: Angelo: I don’t think Mike should have lied to Rosetta about what he was doing last night. Bart: Oh, I don’t know about that. If I had been in his situation I would probably have done the same thing. We avoid this fallacy by keeping the real issue in mind.

Begging the Question Fallacy : 

Begging the Question Fallacy An argument in which the conclusion is assumed in the reasoning. The conclusion of an argument is simply a rewording of a premise. By making our conclusion the same as the premise, we are assuming that the conclusion is true rather than offering proof for it. Also known as circular reasoning.

Begging the Question Fallacy : 

Begging the Question Fallacy Example: “Capital punishment is wrong because it is immoral to inflict death as a punishment for a crime” This fallacy can be very frustrating if we fail to recognize it, since there is now ay to disprove the person’s conclusion if we accept the premise.

Begging the Question Fallacy : 

Begging the Question Fallacy If you think an argument contains this fallacy, try reversing the conclusion and the premise to see if the argument says that same thing (in a different way). Back to our example (reversed): “It is immoral to inflict death as a punishment for a crime , therefore capital punishment is wrong.”

Avoiding Fallacies in Our Writing : 

Avoiding Fallacies in Our Writing Pretend you disagree with the conclusion you are defending. List your main points; under each one, list the evidence you have for it. Learn which types of fallacies you’re prone to and be careful to check for them in your work. Be aware that broad claims need more proof than narrow claims. Double check your characterizations of others.

GROUP WORK : 

GROUP WORK Think about and discuss examples from your daily life in which you have seen/heard people use fallacies. What did you (or the other person) say, what fallacy was used, was the fallacy noticed, and did anyone challenge the fallacy?

Class Assignment 5 : 

Class Assignment 5 12 Angry Men

“12 Angry Men” : 

“12 Angry Men” Identify at least three examples of fallacies discussed in chapter 7. Write a one-page essay discussing how the character or characters in the film committed those fallacies. Do not write a detailed description of the scene. Just discuss the argument made by a character or characters and why you believe that argument represents a fallacy.