I like studying fallacies somewhat because they are used often and rely upon things that are completely irrelevant.
I would like examples of fallacies.
I am going to list fallacies and you must copy it, and fill in any examples you have of each respective fallacy.
If you do not have an example, leave the space blank.
Straw man: A straw man argument is an informal fallacy based on misrepresentation of an opponent's position.
Example:
Fallacy of Many Questions or loaded question: groups more than one question in the form of a single question
Example:
cum hoc ergo propter hoc: believing that happenstance implies causal relation (aka fallacy of causation versus correlation: assumes that correlation implies causation).
Example:
post hoc ergo propter hoc: believing that temporal succession implies a causal relation.
Example:
Fallacy of False Cause or Non Sequitur: incorrectly assumes one thing is the cause of another. Non Sequitur is Latin for "It does not follow."
Example:
Begging the question: demonstrates a conclusion by means of premises that assume that conclusion.
Example:
Denying the antecedent: draws a conclusion from premises that do not support that conclusion by assuming Not P implies Not Q on the basis that P implies Q.
Example:
Affirming the Consequent: draws a conclusion from premises that do not support that conclusion by assuming Q implies P on the basis that P implies Q.
Example:
Fallacy of Accident: a generalization that disregards exceptions.
Example:
Converse Fallacy of Accident: argues from a special case to a general rule.
Example:
Irrelevant Conclusion: diverts attention away from a fact in dispute rather than address it directly.
Example:
Special cases:
purely personal considerations (argumentum ad hominem)
Example:
popular sentiment (argumentum ad populum--appeal to the majority; appeal to loyalty.)
Example:
fear (argumentum ad baculum)
Example:
conventional propriety (argumentum ad verecundiam--appeal to authority)
Example:
to arouse pity for getting one's conclusion accepted (argumentum ad misericordiam)
Example:
proving the proposition under dispute without any certain proof (argumentum ad ignorantiam)
Example:
Here are examples of each of the logical fallacies, to elaborate on the sometimes complex description,
Irrelevant Conclusion:
Argument: Billy believes that war is justifiable, therefore it must be justifiable.
Problem: Billy can be wrong. (In particular this is an appeal to authority.)
Fallacy of Accident:
Argument: Cutting people is a crime. Surgeons cut people. Therefore, surgeons are criminals.
Problem: Cutting people is only sometimes a crime.
Argument: It is illegal for a stranger to enter someone's home uninvited. Firefighters enter people's homes uninvited, therefore firefighters are breaking the law.
Problem: The exception does not break nor define the rule
Converse Fallacy of Accident:
Argument: Every swan I have seen is white, so it must be true that all swans are white.
Problem: What one has seen is a subset of the entire set. One cannot have seen all swans.
Affirming the Consequent:
Argument: If a person runs barefoot, then their feet hurt. Billy's feet hurt. Therefore, Billy ran barefoot.
Problem: Other things, such as tight sandals, can result in sore feet.
Argument: If it rains, the ground gets wet. The ground is wet, therefore it rained.
Problem: There are other ways by which the ground could get wet (i.e. dew).
Denying the antecedent:
Argument: If it is raining out, it must be cloudy. It is not raining out. Therefore, it is not cloudy.
Problem: There does not have to be rain in order for it to be cloudy.
Begging the question:
Argument: The Bible says that God exists and the Bible is always right because it was inspired by God, therefore God exists.
Problem: The premises are circular in nature because each premise is assuming the other.
Fallacy of False Cause or Non Sequitur:
Argument: Our nation will prevail because God is great.
Problem: There is no necessary cause and effect between God's greatness and a nation prevailing. Simply because God can be considered great does not mean a nation will prevail.
post hoc ergo propter hoc:
Argument: After Billy had his vaccine, he developed autism. Therefore, the vaccine caused autism.
Problem: The characteristics of autism may generally become noticeable at the age just following the typical age children receive vaccinations.
cum hoc ergo propter hoc:
Argument: More cows die in India in the summer months. More ice cream is consumed in summer months. Therefore, the consumption of ice cream in the summer months is killing Indian cows.
Problem: It is hotter in the summer, resulting in both the death of cows and the consumption of ice cream.
Fallacy of Many Questions or loaded question:
Argument: Is it true that you no longer beat your wife?
Problem: A yes or no answer will still be an admission of guilt to beating your wife at some point.
Straw man:
Person A claims: Sunny days are good.
Argument Person B: If all days were sunny, we'd never have rain, and without rain, we'd have famine and death. You are obviously wrong.
Problem: B has falsely framed A's claim to imply that A says that only sunny days are good, and has argued against that assertion instead of the assertion A has made.
I bolded some text out of fear that THIS would happen.
10 Mar 2010, 11:18 am
