TOPIC 4:
FALLACIES
What is fallacy?
A (logical) fallacy is an argument that contains a mistake in
reasoning.
Fallacies can be divided into two general types:
Fallacies of Arguments in which the premises are logically
Relevance irrelevant to the conclusion.
Fallacies of Arguments in which the premises, though
Insufficient logically relevant to the conclusion, fail to
Evidence provide sufficient evidence for the conclusion.
Fallacies of Relevance
A statement is RELEVANT to another statement if it provides at
least some reason for thinking that the second statement is true or
false, i.e. the premises are logically relevant/irrelevant to the
conclusion.
There are three ways in which a statement can be relevant or
irrelevant to another:
• A statement is positively relevant to another statement if it provides at least some
reason for thinking that the second statement is true.
• A statement is negatively relevant to another statement if it provides at least some
reason for thinking that the second statement is false.
• A statement is logically irrelevant to another statement if it provides no reason for
thinking that the second statement is either true or false.
example #1 4
• All Olympic runners are fast.
• Michael is an Olympic runner.
• ► Michael is fast.
example #2 5
• All UNITAR students are smart.
• Joe is a UNITAR student.
• Joe is smart.
example #3 6
• All dogs are animals.
• All cats are animals.
• All dogs are cats.
example #4 7
Question: How did the window get broken?
Evidence: There is a baseball on the floor.
Baseball wasn't there this a.m.
Kids were in the yard across the street.
They were playing baseball this afternoon.
They stopped playing earlier than usual.
They aren't in the yard now.
Conclusion: One of the kids broke the window with the
ball and then they all ran away.
Example #4 continued: 8
BUT what if…
…you have a Bears flag in your front
yard?
…you live next to Mr. Thompson (aka
Packers’ fan)
a) Personal attack (Ad Hominem)
We reject someone’s argument or claim by attacking the person rather than
the person’s argument or claim.
1) X is a bad person.
2) Therefore X’s argument must be bad.
Person A: I think that the US will come out of this recession quickly.
Person B: What do you know about economics? You don't even have a job!
The fallacy of personal attack occurs only if:
1. An arguer rejects another person’s argument or claim
2. The arguer attacks the person who offers the argument or claim,
rather than considering the merits of that argument or claim.
b) Attacking the Motive
Is the error of criticizing a person’s motivation for offering a particular
argument or claim, rather that examining the worth of the argument or claim
itself.
1) X has biased or has questionable motives.
2) Therefore X’s argument or claim should be rejected.
c) Look Who’s Talking (Tu Quoque)
Is committed when an arguer rejects another person’s argument or claim
because the person fails to practice what he preaches.
1) X fails to follow his or her own advice.
2) Therefore, X’s claim or argument should be rejected.
d) Two Wrongs Make a Right
When an arguer attempts to justify a wrongful act
by claiming that some other act is just as bad or worse.
1) Others are committing worse or equally bad acts.
2) Therefore, my wrongful act is justified.
e) Scare Tactics (appealing to fear)
When an arguer threatens harm to a reader or listener and this threat is
irrelevant to the truth of the arguer’s conclusion.
Fear is a powerful motivator – so powerful that it often causes us to think
and behave irrationally.
Scare tactics…
f) Appeal to Pity
When an arguer attempts to evoke feelings of pity or compassion, where
such feelings, however understandable, are not relevant to the truth of the
arguer’s conclusion.
1) P is presented, with the intent to create pity.
2) Therefore claim C is true.
g) Bandwagon Argument (Peer Pressure)
When an arguer appeals to a person’s desire to be popular, accepted, or
valued, rather than to logically relevant reasons or evidence.
1) Most (or a select group of) people believe or do X.
2) Therefore, you should believe or do X.
h) Straw Man
When an arguer misrepresents another person’s position to make it easier
to attack.
1) Person A has position X.
2) Person B present position Y (which is a distorted version of X)
3) Person B attacks position Y.
4) Therefore X is false/incorrect/flawed.
i) Red Herring
When an arguer raises some irrelevant issues that diverts attention from the main
subject. It serves to increase the force of the argument in a very misleading
manner.
1) Topic A is under discussion.
2) Topic B is introduced under the guise of being relevant to topic A
(when topic B is actually not relevant to topic A).
3) Topic A is abandoned.
j) Equivocation
When an arguer uses a key word in an argument in two (or more) different
senses.
Fallacies of equivocation can be difficult to spot because they often
appear valid, but they aren’t.
k) Begging the Question
When an arguer states or assumes as a premise (reason) the very thing he
is seeking to probe as a conclusion.
Begging the question, sometimes known by its Latin name petitio principii
(meaning assuming the initial point), is a logical fallacy in which the writer or
speaker assumes the statement under examination to be true. In other
words, begging the question involves using a premise to support itself.
Arguing in a circle – A because B, B because A
Fallacies of Insufficient Evidence
Arguments in which the premises, though logically relevant to the
conclusion, fail to provide sufficient evidence to support the
conclusion.
a) Inappropriate Appeal to Authority
Citing a witness or authority that is untrustworthy.
occurs when an arguer uses a person of authority as evidence
for a claim to be true.
1) Is the source an authority on the subject at issue?
2) Is the source biased?
3) Is the accuracy of the source observations questionable?
4) Has the source been cited correctly?
b) Appeal to Ignorance
Claiming that something is true because no one has proven it false or vice
versa.
“Not proven, therefore false”
If such reasoning were allowed, we could prove almost any conclusion.
c) False Alternatives
Posing a false either/or choice.
A false dilemma is a type of informal fallacy in which something is falsely
claimed to be an "either/or" situation, when in fact there is at least one
additional option. A false dilemma can arise intentionally, when a fallacy is
used in an attempt to force a choice or outcome.
Fallacy of false alternatives can involve more than TWO alternatives. It can
also be expressed as a conditional (if-then) statement.
d) Loaded Questions
Posing a question that contains an unfair or unwarranted presupposition.
To respond to a loaded question effectively, one must distinguish the
different questions being asked and respond to each individually.
e) Questionable Cause
Claiming, without sufficient evidence, that one
thing is the cause of something else.
1) A and B are associated on a regular basis.
2) Therefore A is the cause of B.
f) Hasty Generalization
Drawing a general conclusion from a sample that is biased or too small.
1) A biased sample is one that is not representative of the target population.
2) The target population is the group of people or things that the generalization is about.
3) Hasty generalizations can often lead to false stereotypes.
g) Slippery Slope
Claiming, without sufficient evidence, that a seemingly harmless action, if
taken, will lead to a disastrous outcome.
1) The arguer claims that if a certain seemingly harmless action, A, is
permitted, A will lead to B, B will lead to C and so on to D.
2) The arguer holds that D is a terrible thing and therefore should not be
permitted.
3) In fact, there is no good reason to believe that A will actually lead to D.
h) Weak Analogy
Comparing things that aren’t really comparable.
1) List all important similarities between the two cases.
2) List all important dissimilarities between the two cases.
3) Decide whether the similarities or dissimilarities are more important.
i) Inconsistency
Asserting inconsistent or contradictory claims.
It is also a mistake to cling stubbornly to an old idea when new information
suggests that the idea is false.
Open-minded to new ideas = LEARNING