Fallacies PDF

A.FALLACIES OF RELEVANCE An irrelevant conclusion, also known as ignoratio elenchi or missing the point, is the informal fallacy of presenting an argument that may or may not be logically valid and sound, but fails to address the issue in question, It is also called 1. Ignoring the issue 2...

A.FALLACIES OF RELEVANCE An irrelevant conclusion, also known as ignoratio elenchi or missing the point, is the informal fallacy of presenting an argument that may or may not be logically valid and sound, but fails to address the issue in question, It is also called 1. Ignoring the issue 2. Missing the point 3. Red herring 4. Ignorance of the question 5. Irrelevant Conclusion The Latin word elenchi came from the Greek word elencho, which means refutation. Example: EVIL EXISTS, Therefore, an all-loving and all-powerful God does not exist. If evil exist then it is right to say that God also exists. If contradicted refuting is just a mere defense leading to ignoring the issue The fallacy of relevance occur when it is assumed that, because one thing happened after another, it must have occurred as a result of it. Irrelevant Conclusion - tries to establish the truth of a proposition by offering and argument that supports a different conclusion. Drawing conclusion that do not follow from previous information Examples: Children need attention and working parents does not have time to give that attention, therefore, mothers should stay at home. This premise supports a conclusion about working parents and not just mothers. The house across the street is sale. The ownesrs must have lost all their money gambling. Red Herring - Attempts to distract from the main issue by bringing in irrelevant information. Pressing an argument unrelated to your subject in order to distract the reader. Examples: Man: What is your plan to address climate change? Woman: My tax cut boosted the economy. In order to really look at the problem of global warming, we must first consider how the homeless suffer when it is cold. B. APPEAL TO FORCE (ARGUMENTUM AD BACULUM)- there is use of power over another who dares to disagree to accept a proposition. There is resorting to coercion, intimidation, threat,or strong-arm tactics. It proposes the idea that 'might is right'. This fallacy is also called 'APPEAL TO THE STICK' Example a. I believe that Obama is the greatest American president of all times. b. If you don't accept what I believe, I will fail you. c. Therefore, Obama is the greatest American president of all times. d. If you don't believe in God you will go to hell.  e. If you don't approve my answer I will punch you in the face. C. APPEAL TO PITY (ARGUMENTUM AD MISERICORDIAM) - the story, or the Galileo argument) is a fallacy in which someone tries to win support for an argument or idea by exploiting one's opponent's feelings of pity or guilt. It is a specific kind of appeal to emotion.The hearer is urged to accept the argument based upon an appeal to emotions, sympathy, etc. It takes place, when an arguer tries to get people accept a conclusion by making them feel sorry for someone Examples: 1. You owe me big time because I really stuck my neck out for you 2. Oh come on, I have been sick. That is why I missed the deadline 3.I know the exam is graded based on performance, but you should give me an A. My cat has been sick my car broke down, and I have a cold, so it as really hard for me to study. 4. Mr. Romeo, it would be wrong for you to flunk me for cheating. I am a single mother, and to provide for my kids, I have to work to jobs. At the end of the day I am exhausted and don't have time to study. D. ARGUMENTUM AD POPULUM /BANDWAGON- Argument or appeal to the public. This is the fallacy of trying to prove something by showing that the pubtic agrees with you or concludes a proposition to be true because many or most people believe it. Te arguer tries to convince the audience to do or believe something because everyone else. (supposedly does. Examples: At least 70% of all Americans support restrictions on access to abortions. It alleges: If many believe so, it is so. An increasing number of people are turning to yoga as a way to get in touch with their inner-being. Therefore, yoga helps one get in touch with their inner-being. LOGICAL FALLACY: APPEAL TO MASSES Where an idea or proposal is given merit or dismissed based purely on its popularity or widespread belief Why is it illogical? Because evidence does not change based on people's beliefs. The fallacy is faulty logic that undermines an argument's validity. E. APPEAL TO FALSE AUTHORITY (ARGUMNETUM AD VERECUNDIAM)- Here, the view or opinion of anotable person, himself expert in some other field of specialization is presumed to warrant the truth if a conclusion. In other words, a wrong or unqualified authority is here referred to prove a conclusion. 1. An example of an appeal to false authority is a media celebrity with no medical expertise who endorses an extreme diet, while implying that their fame alone means that they're qualified to speak on the topic of nutrition. 2. Next year is the second coming of Jesus Christ. Manny Pacquiao believes so. 3. A false authority with irrelevant credentials or expertise (also known as irrelevant authority). This occurs in cases where the supposed authority figure has valid credentials or expertise, but these are irrelevant to the discussion at hand. For example, a physics professor who gives medical advice despite having no medical expertise might be considered a false authority with irrelevant credentials. A false authority with dubious credentials or expertise. This occurs in cases where the supposed authority figure does have some relevant credentials or expertise, but these are of questionable quality. For example, someone who gives medical advice because they paid online to get a medical certification with no required training might be considered a false authority with dubious credentials. A false authority with insufficient credentials or expertise. This occurs in cases where the supposed authority figure has credentials or expertise that are relevant and valid, but are not sufficient when it comes to the topic under consideration. For example someone who has a first-aid certificate and weighs in on complex medical topics that were not covered by their training might be considered a false authority with insufficient credentials. A false authority with no credentials or expertise. This occurs in cases where the supposed authority has no credentials or expertise at all. For example, a layperson with no medical training who tries to give out medical advice based on their uninformed opinion might be considered a false authority with no credentials F.APPEAL TO AUTHORITY (ARGUMENTUM AD AUTORITATEM) Appeal to authority is a common type of fallacy, or an argument based on unsound logic. When writers or speakers use appeal to authority, they are claiming that something must be true because it is believed by someone who said to be an "authority" on the subject. Whether the person is actually an authority or not, the logic is unsound. Instead of presenting actual evidence, the argument just relies on the credibility of the "authority." Examples: 1.A commercial claim that a specific brand of cereal is the best way to start the day because athlete Michael Jordan says that it is what he eats every day for breakfast. 2.A book argues that global warming is not actually happening, and cites the research of one environmental scientist who has been studying climate change for several years. 3. Someone argues that drinking is morally wrong and cites a sermon from her pastor at church. 4. A little boy says that his friends should not go swimming in a river because his Mama said there were germs in the river. 5. A commercial claim that 3 out of 4 dentists would choose this particular brand of toothpaste for their own families to use 6. My sister-in-law, who is a teacher, said that this school is not somewhere that / would want to send my children. G. ARGUMENT AGAINST THE PERSON (ARGUMENTUM AD HOMINEM) Attacking the person making the argument rather than the argument itself, when the attack on the person is completely irrelevant to the argument the person is making. This is the error of attacking the character or motives of a person who has stated an idea, rather than the idea itself. The most obvious example of this fallacy is when one debater maligns the character of another debater. This is one which is used to make remarks against your opponent in a personal capacity rather than to make an attack against his or her argument. The term Ad Hominem translates from the Latin against the man which shows us clearly what this type of fallacy is all about This type of fallacy is a way of countering an opposing point of view on a more personal level and when used makes remarks regarding topics which are completely irrelevant to the discussion which is taking place, therefore losing its logic. The Ad Hominem fallacy may make personal comments about the character of the opposition or it might attack their motives for having an argument in the first place, both of which have nothing to do with the argument itself. Example: We should argue with relevant facts and sound logic. You should grow a brain before opening your mounth H. APPEAL TO IGNORANCE (ARGUMENTUM AD IGNORANTIAM) Here, a proposition's truth or falsity is accepted unless it is proven otherwise. When you assert that a thing is true because it cannot be proven false, or a thing is false because it cannot be proven true, you commit the fallacy. I. FALLACIES OF PRESUMPTION Are ineffective in providing sufficing reason for their conclusion to be accepted as true. The erroneous reasoning in these fallacies is basically the result of an inferred supposition of some further proposition, the truth of which is either doubtful or still debatable 1. Accident-the fallacy of accident states some principles that are generally true and errs when it applies this principle to an accident or exceptional case. In other words, this fallacy is committed when you take a general rule and apply it to its atypical or exceptional case. Example: Jose is a an agent of the authority who killed an NPA in an encounter. As we all know killing is a crime. Therefore, Jose is a criminal 2. Converse accident-it is also called "hasty generalization. It is concluding based on insufficient or unrepresentative evidence. Example: Jose is a Latin Honor and a PRC board passer. Therefore,he could pass in all kinds of examinations. J. FALSE CAUSE (POST HOC ERGO PROPTER HOC)-When you assume that just because one event follows another then the first is the cause of the second Example: A 3-month old baby boy was first met by her auntie. The auntie was so stunned to the cutest baby. In the afternoon, the baby suffered from stomach pain. The mother assumed that the baby's auntie's was the cause of the stomach pain. K. BEGGING THE QUESTION (PETITIO PRINCIPII). This fallacy takes two (2) forms a) Assumptio non probata -this is committed when what has yet to be proven true is assumed as already proved and is used as a premise by what one wants to conclude. Example: Filipinos are smart. Therefore, Jose a Filipino is smart. b) Circular reasoning(circulus in probando). This occurs when you use a premise to prove the conclusion and then use the same conclusion to prove the premise. Example: Filipinos are the most hospitable people in the world because they are godly. Why is it that the Filipinos are godly?Because Filipinos are the most hospitable people in the world. L. COMPLEX QUESTION-This fallacy assumes the truth of its own conclusion by loading it implicitly in the question that is asked. Example: Have you stopped driving a car? If so, then you admit that you drove a car. If not, you must be driving a car Therefore, you are driving a car. M. NEGLECT ASPECT- This happens when you conclude based on some pieces of evidence while neglecting or ignoring those that would endorse other conclusion. Example: Brand A car cost to purchase and operate. But it costs more to maintain and repair than other brands. Brand A car therefore is the best brand. N. FALLACIES OF AMBIGUITY The error of these forms of invalid arguments originates from the imprecise use of language that results in ambiquity or confusion. An ambiquous word, phrase, or sentence is that which has two or more distinct meanings. Hence, the fallacies of ambiguity include a confusion of two or more senses. 1.Equivocation -this takes place when in an argument,one of the meanings of an ambiguous word or phrase is used in one statement and its other meaning in another proposition. Example: Animal is irrational. No cat is irrational. Therefore, no cat is irrational 2. Amphiboly -occurs when it is the grammatical construction of a sentence that creates the ambiguity. Example: A teacher says, I admire all youth of today, which I believe they are the hope of the father land. 3. Accent-the fallacy of accent emerges when the ambiguity is created by a change in spoken or written emphasis. Example: The teacher says, Jose is smart Therefore, Jose is smart according to the teacher. 4. Compasition-Here, the quality possessed by members of a class (or parts of a greater whole) is confused to be also exhibited by the entire class (or whole). When a feather is dropped from a 6-story building, it glides to earth very slowly. Therefore, IfI would drop this pillow composed of feathers from a 6-storey building. It too will float to earth slowly 5. Division - Being the converse of the fallacy of composition, fallacy of division claim that what can be said of the whole can necessarily be said of its parts. Example: Former president Duterte's administration provides fair system in the government. Therefore, DSWD's 4Ps program was fairly distributed. O. MISCELLANEOUS FALLACIES The following types of invalid arguments do not fall under the fallacies of relevance, presumption, and ambiguity, but nonetheless considered informal fallacies 1, Self-contradiction -it involves submitting an argument which carries contradictory or inconsistent premises. The following is an example of a self-contradicting statement. Example: The teacher teaches the unteachable person. 2. False analogy -one erroneously presupposes that because two things are alike in one aspect, they must be alike in others. Example: In His will to gather the children of Jerusalem together, the Lord Jesus Christ, and, "I wanted to gather your children together, as a hen gathers her chicks under her wings. Preacher: Therefore, Jesus Christ, like a real hen, must have wings. 3. Black or white-also called false dichotomy, either or fallacy, bifurcation, false dilemma, the black or white fallacy arises when one limits the options to two, oftentimes between the extrome, when fact there are more. Example: Either learn to speak English fluently or you won't be able to get any job. 4. Fallacy of Significance-This is also called statistical fallacy and is committed when one concludes based on the statistics or evidences presented without questioning how they are gathered or how"sianificant" they areto the issue. Example According to the survey, more motorists using Honda. 5.Quoting out of context-this is another fallacy committed very commonly especially by advocacy writers. It involves quoting very selectively and unfairly froma longer passage, thereby distorting the meaning of the original text: on I would only court her if, and only if, she is the only woman available, or if were an Island and had no other woman live. 6.Straw man fallacy- you are guilty of this fallacy if you construe someone's position on a given matter in such a way as to make him most susceptible to attack and criticism. Commonly, it is done by reducing a complex argument to an exaggeratedly simple form thereby leaving out some of its important components. 7. Non sequitur - validity is the condition of an argument in which when the premises are true,the conclusionCannot validargument,the truthofthe premises necessitates the truth of the conclusion that is, the conclusion necessarily follows from the premises. Logically speaking, all invalid or fallacious arguments have one thing in common: their conclusions do not follow from their premises. It is therefore not wrong to call all kinds of fallacious argument non-sequitur, which means "it does not follow.