مغالطات Flashcards
all of it.
What is the Special Pleading Fallacy?
It’s when someone applies a rule to others but makes an unjustified exception for themselves or their argument.
Why is Special Pleading a fallacy?
Because it introduces an arbitrary exception without valid reasoning, undermining the fairness or consistency of the argument.
How can you identify Special Pleading?
Look for cases where someone creates an exception to a rule without a valid, logical reason.
What is an example of Special Pleading?
“Everyone should follow the speed limit, but I’m allowed to speed because I’m late.”
What is a non-fallacious way to justify an exception?
Provide evidence or reasoning that demonstrates why the exception is logically or morally justified.
How can you avoid Special Pleading?
Apply the same rules consistently to all parties, including yourself, unless there is a valid and well-supported reason for an exception.
What is the No True Scotsman Fallacy?
It’s when someone redefines a group or category to exclude counterexamples that challenge their claim.
Why is the No True Scotsman Fallacy problematic?
Because it avoids addressing valid counterexamples by arbitrarily redefining the group.
What is an example of the No True Scotsman Fallacy?
“No true Scotsman puts sugar in their porridge,” dismissing a counterexample of a Scotsman who does.
How can you identify the No True Scotsman Fallacy?
Look for cases where someone dismisses a counterexample by saying, “No true [group member] would do that.”
How can you avoid the No True Scotsman Fallacy?
Accept counterexamples as valid and refine your argument to address them instead of redefining the group.
What is an example of the fallacy in religion?
“No true Christian would ever be unkind,” dismissing examples of unkind Christians.
What’s the difference between the No True Scotsman Fallacy and a valid exception?
A valid exception is based on clear, consistent criteria, while the fallacy arbitrarily redefines the group to dismiss inconvenient examples.
What is the Cherry Picking Fallacy?
It’s when someone selectively presents evidence that supports their argument while ignoring evidence that contradicts it.
Why is Cherry Picking a fallacy?
Because it creates a biased or incomplete picture of the situation, leading to misleading conclusions.
What is an example of Cherry Picking?
“Crime is decreasing because one neighborhood had a 20% drop,” ignoring increases in other neighborhoods.
How can you identify Cherry Picking?
Look for evidence that is selectively chosen to support a claim while ignoring contradictory evidence.
How can you avoid Cherry Picking?
Consider all relevant evidence, both supporting and contradicting your argument, before drawing conclusions.
What is an example of Cherry Picking in health claims?
“Eating chocolate is healthy because it contains antioxidants,” ignoring its high sugar and fat content.
What’s the difference between Cherry Picking and focusing on relevant evidence?
Cherry Picking involves ignoring contradictory evidence, while focusing on relevant evidence considers the full context of the argument.
What is the Wishful Thinking Fallacy?
It’s when someone believes something is true or false simply because they want it to be that way, rather than basing it on evidence or logic.
Why is Wishful Thinking a fallacy?
Because it replaces critical thinking with emotional desire, leading to beliefs that may not align with reality.
What is an example of Wishful Thinking?
“I don’t need to study for the exam because I know I’ll do well,” without any evidence or preparation.
How can you identify Wishful Thinking?
Look for beliefs that are based on hope, fear, or desire instead of evidence or rationality.
How can you avoid Wishful Thinking?
Focus on evidence and logic, even if the reality is uncomfortable or doesn’t align with your desires.
What is an example of Wishful Thinking in science denial?
“Climate change can’t be real because it’s too scary to think about.”
What’s the difference between optimism and Wishful Thinking?
Optimism is hoping for the best while acknowledging reality, whereas Wishful Thinking ignores reality in favor of what you want to believe.
What is the Base Rate Fallacy?
It occurs when someone ignores the general probability (base rate) of an event and focuses on specific information, leading to flawed reasoning.
Why is the Base Rate Fallacy a problem?
It leads to incorrect conclusions by undervaluing general statistical information in favor of anecdotal or specific data.
Give an example of the Base Rate Fallacy in medical diagnosis.
A test for a rare disease (1 in 10,000) is 99% accurate. A positive result doesn’t mean the person has the disease because the base rate of the disease is so low.
How can you avoid the Base Rate Fallacy?
Always consider the base rate (general probability) first, then combine it with specific evidence using logical reasoning.
What is Bayesian reasoning, and how does it relate to the Base Rate Fallacy?
Bayesian reasoning combines base rates with specific evidence to make more accurate probability judgments, helping to avoid the Base Rate Fallacy.
What is the Masked Man Fallacy?
It’s a logical error where someone assumes that if two things are identical, they must share all the same properties, including knowledge or beliefs about them.
What is an example of the Masked Man Fallacy?
“I know who my father is, but I don’t know who the masked man is. Therefore, my father is not the masked man.”
What is the main error in the Masked Man Fallacy?
Confusing knowledge or belief about something with the actual identity or properties of the thing itself.
How can you avoid the Masked Man Fallacy?
By understanding that your knowledge or belief about something doesn’t determine its actual identity or properties.
What is the typical structure of the Masked Man Fallacy?
- I know X about A
- I don’t know X about B
- Therefore, A ≠ B (invalid conclusion)
What’s the classic example of the Masked Man Fallacy?
“I know who my father is, but I don’t know who that masked man is. Therefore, that masked man cannot be my father.”
Why is the Masked Man Fallacy incorrect?
It confuses properties of our knowledge with properties of the actual things. Our knowledge (or lack of it) doesn’t change the identity of things.
How might this fallacy appear in everyday life?
“I know my coworker John likes coffee, but I don’t know if the person who ate my lunch likes coffee. Therefore, John couldn’t have eaten my lunch.”
What is the Appeal to Probability fallacy?
A logical error where someone treats something that is merely possible or probable as if it were certain or already true.
What is the typical structure of an Appeal to Probability?
- X could happen (possibility)
- Therefore, X will happen (invalid conclusion)
OR - X is likely to happen
- Therefore, we should treat X as if it has already happened
What’s a common example of Appeal to Probability?
“You shouldn’t drive a car because you might get into an accident.” (Treats a possibility as if it were a certainty)
Why is the Appeal to Probability fallacious?
It confuses possibility or probability with certainty. Just because something could happen doesn’t mean it will happen or should be treated as if it has happened.
How does this fallacy appear in everyday decision-making?
“Don’t invest in stocks because you might lose money.” This fallacy prevents rational risk assessment by treating a possibility as an inevitability.
What is the Red Herring Fallacy?
A logical fallacy where someone introduces an irrelevant topic to divert attention from the original issue being discussed.
Where does the term “Red Herring” come from?
From the practice of using smoked herring (which turns red) to train hunting dogs or to throw them off a scent trail.
What is the typical structure of a Red Herring argument?
- Topic A is being discussed
- Person introduces unrelated Topic B
- Discussion shifts to Topic B
- Topic A remains unresolved
What’s a classic example of a Red Herring?
“Why did you fail the exam?” - “Well, many students are failing classes these days due to social media addiction.” (Diverts from personal responsibility to a broader social issue)
How can you recognize a Red Herring?
Look for:
- Sudden topic changes
- Introduction of emotional but irrelevant issues
- Responses that don’t address the original point
- Attempts to shift focus to broader or unrelated issues
What is the Linda Problem?
A psychological experiment that reveals how people often violate basic probability rules by judging a conjunction (A AND B) as more likely than one of its components (A) alone.
Why is the conjunction fallacy mathematically wrong?
The probability of two events occurring together (A AND B) can never be greater than the probability of either event occurring alone. P(A AND B) ≤ P(A) and P(A AND B) ≤ P(B)
Why do people fall for the Linda Problem?
People often use representativeness heuristic (mental shortcut) instead of probability rules. They choose what “fits better” with the description rather than what’s mathematically more probable.
How does the Linda Problem affect real-life decision making?
It can lead to poor judgments in:
- Risk assessment
- Medical diagnoses
- Investment decisions
- Legal reasoning
- Stereotyping
How can you avoid the conjunction fallacy?
- Focus on basic probability rules
- Draw Venn diagrams
- Remember: specific combinations are always less likely than general categories
- Question intuitive judgments
What is Affirming the Consequent?
A logical fallacy where someone incorrectly concludes that if a conditional statement’s consequent (Q) is true, its antecedent (P) must also be true.
What’s the basic structure of this fallacy?
- If P, then Q
- Q is true
- Therefore, P is true (Invalid!)
What’s a simple example of Affirming the Consequent?
- If it’s raining, the ground is wet (If P, then Q)
- The ground is wet (Q is true)
- Therefore, it must be raining (Invalid conclusion P)
(The ground could be wet for many other reasons!)
Why is Affirming the Consequent fallacious?
Because there might be multiple causes (P1, P2, P3…) that could lead to the same result (Q). Just because Q is true doesn’t mean any specific P caused it.
How can you recognize this fallacy?
Look for:
- If/then statements
- Observation of the result (Q)
- Conclusion about the cause (P)
- Ignoring other possible causes
What is the Fallacy of Composition?
A logical fallacy where someone incorrectly concludes that what’s true for individual parts must be true for the whole system or group.
What’s the key distinction to remember about the Fallacy of Composition?
Properties of parts don’t necessarily transfer to the whole. What’s true for individual members might create different or even opposite effects when applied collectively.
What’s the classic stadium example of the Fallacy of Composition?
“If one person stands up at a stadium, they can see better. Therefore, if everyone stands up, everyone will see better.” (In reality, if everyone stands, no one gains an advantage)
What’s a common economic example of this fallacy?
“If one person saves money, they’ll be better off financially. Therefore, if everyone saves money at the same time, everyone will be better off.” (This ignores that mass saving can lead to economic slowdown)
How can you recognize the Fallacy of Composition?
Look for:
- Arguments that jump from individual to collective benefits
- Assumptions about scaling effects
- Ignoring system-level interactions
- Overlooking emergent properties
What is the Fallacy of Division?
A logical fallacy where someone incorrectly concludes that what’s true for the whole must also be true for its individual parts or members.
How is the Fallacy of Division different from the Fallacy of Composition?
Division goes from whole to parts (top-down), while Composition goes from parts to whole (bottom-up). Both are incorrect ways of reasoning.
What’s a classic example of the Fallacy of Division?
“The United States is the richest country in the world, therefore all Americans must be rich.” (This ignores wealth distribution and individual circumstances)
How can you spot the Fallacy of Division?
Look for:
- Arguments that move from whole to parts
- Assumptions about group characteristics applying to individuals
- Ignoring individual variations
- Overlooking distribution patterns
In what contexts does this fallacy commonly appear?
- Statistics and averages
- Group characteristics
- Organizational behavior
- Social stereotypes
- Economic analysis
What is an Appeal to Emotion fallacy?
A logical fallacy where someone tries to win an argument by manipulating emotions instead of providing valid logical reasoning or evidence.
What are the main types of emotional appeals used in this fallacy?
- Fear (Appeal to Fear)
- Pity (Appeal to Pity)
- Pride (Appeal to Pride)
- Anger (Appeal to Anger)
- Guilt (Appeal to Guilt)
- Happiness (Appeal to Happiness)
How can you recognize an Appeal to Emotion?
Look for:
- Strong emotional language
- Dramatic imagery or stories
- Lack of logical evidence
- Manipulation of feelings
- Pressure to make quick decisions
- Appeal to personal feelings over facts
What’s a common marketing example of Appeal to Emotion?
“Don’t let your family down - buy our life insurance today! Can you imagine how they’d feel if something happened to you?” (Uses guilt and fear instead of discussing policy benefits)
How is Appeal to Emotion used in politics?
“A vote for the opposition is a vote against our children’s future!” (Uses fear and guilt without addressing actual policies)
What is an Appeal to Moderation fallacy?
A logical fallacy that assumes the middle ground or compromise between two positions is always the correct answer, regardless of the evidence or merit of either position.
How can you recognize an Appeal to Moderation?
Look for:
- Suggestions that “the truth lies in the middle”
- Automatic compromise proposals
- Dismissal of “extreme” positions
- Assumption that moderation is always wise
- Equal treatment of valid and invalid positions
What’s the main problem with Appeal to Moderation?
It assumes that the middle ground is always correct, when sometimes one position might be entirely right and another entirely wrong. Truth isn’t determined by how moderate a position is.
What phrases often signal an Appeal to Moderation?
- “Let’s meet in the middle”
- “Both sides are extreme”
- “The truth lies somewhere in between”
- “We need a balanced approach”
- “Neither extreme is right”
Give an example of Appeal to Moderation in practice?
If one person says “2+2=4” and another says “2+2=6”, the fallacy would suggest that “2+2=5” must be correct because it’s in the middle, which is clearly wrong.
What is a Definitional Fallacy?
A logical error that occurs when someone misuses definitions, changes them mid-argument, or manipulates them to support their conclusion rather than using consistent, accepted meanings.
What are the main types of Definitional Fallacies?
- Equivocation (using multiple meanings of a word)
- No True Scotsman (changing definitions to exclude counterexamples)
- Persuasive Definition (loaded or biased definitions)
- Definist Fallacy (defining something in terms of what you want to prove)
How can you recognize a Definitional Fallacy?
Look for:
- Shifting meanings of terms within an argument
- Unusual or non-standard definitions
- Definitions that seem crafted to win the argument
- Terms used inconsistently
- Circular definitions
What’s a classic example of Definitional Fallacy?
“No true vegetarian would eat fish. Sarah eats fish but claims to be vegetarian, therefore she’s not really a vegetarian.” (This is a No True Scotsman variation, arbitrarily redefining “vegetarian”)
How can you prevent Definitional Fallacies in your own arguments?
- Define terms clearly at the start
- Use standard, accepted definitions
- Maintain consistent usage throughout
- Acknowledge when terms have multiple meanings
- Be precise in language choice
What is an Ambiguity Fallacy?
A logical fallacy where an argument uses words or phrases that can be interpreted in multiple ways, leading to confusion or invalid conclusions due to the shifting meanings.
What are the main types of Ambiguity Fallacies?
- Semantic Ambiguity (words with multiple meanings)
- Syntactic Ambiguity (unclear sentence structure)
- Scope Ambiguity (unclear what terms modify)
- Referential Ambiguity (unclear what pronouns refer to)
How can you spot an Ambiguity Fallacy?
Look for:
- Words used with multiple meanings
- Unclear pronoun references
- Confusing sentence structures
- Double meanings
- Statements that could be interpreted multiple ways
What’s a classic example of Ambiguity Fallacy?
“All stars are in the sky. Movie stars are stars. Therefore, all movie stars are in the sky.” (The word “star” is used with two different meanings)
How can you prevent Ambiguity Fallacies?
- Define terms clearly
- Use precise language
- Maintain consistent meanings
- Clarify pronouns
- Structure sentences carefully
What is an Argument from Incredulity?
A logical fallacy where someone rejects or accepts an argument simply because they personally find it difficult to understand or believe, rather than based on actual evidence.
What are the two main forms of Argument from Incredulity?
- Negative: “I can’t understand it, so it must be false”
- Positive: “I can’t imagine it being false, so it must be true”
What phrases often signal an Argument from Incredulity?
- “I can’t believe that…”
- “It’s impossible to imagine…”
- “How could that possibly be true?”
- “It’s just common sense that…”
- “There’s no way that…”
Give an example of this fallacy in science?
“I can’t understand how evolution could create such complex organisms, therefore it must be false.” (Personal inability to understand doesn’t make something false)
How can you counter an Argument from Incredulity?
- Ask for specific evidence
- Point out that personal understanding isn’t a measure of truth
- Provide concrete examples
- Explain that complexity doesn’t equal impossibility
- Share analogies to help understanding
What is the Divine Fallacy?
A logical fallacy where someone attributes a phenomenon to divine or supernatural causes simply because it is complex, beautiful, or difficult to explain through natural means.
What are common indicators of the Divine Fallacy?
- “It’s too perfect to be natural”
- “Only God could create something this complex”
- “This can’t be explained by science”
- “It must be supernatural because it’s so amazing”
- “There’s no way this happened by chance”
What are some typical examples of Divine Fallacy?
- Claiming DNA is too complex to have evolved naturally
- Attributing beautiful natural phenomena to supernatural design
- Arguing consciousness must be divine because it’s mysterious
- Suggesting mathematical principles prove divine creation
How has the Divine Fallacy influenced history?
Throughout history, natural phenomena like earthquakes, eclipses, and diseases were often attributed to divine causes until scientific explanations were discovered and understood.
How can you counter the Divine Fallacy?
- Explain that complexity doesn’t imply supernatural causes
- Provide scientific explanations
- Show examples of natural complexity
- Demonstrate evolutionary processes
- Point out historical examples where natural explanations replaced supernatural ones
What is the “If by Whiskey” fallacy?
A rhetorical technique where a speaker appears to take both sides of an argument simultaneously by using emotionally charged language to describe the same subject in both positive and negative terms.
Where does the name “If by Whiskey” come from?
It comes from a 1952 speech by Mississippi legislator Noah S. “Soggy” Sweat Jr. about prohibition, where he eloquently argued both for and against whiskey using emotional appeals.
What is the typical structure of an “If by Whiskey” argument?
- “If by [X] you mean…” (positive attributes)
- “But if by [X] you mean…” (negative attributes)
- Both descriptions refer to the same thing
- Uses emotionally charged language
- Avoids taking a clear stance
How can you identify an “If by Whiskey” argument?
- Dual opposing descriptions
- Heavy use of emotional language
- Seemingly contradictory positions
- Ambiguous conclusion
- Appeals to different audiences simultaneously
What was Sweat’s original “If by Whiskey” speech about?
He described whiskey both as “the devil’s brew” that causes misery and as “the philosophical wine” that brings joy, effectively speaking to both prohibitionists and anti-prohibitionists without taking a clear stance.
What is a Complete Comparison fallacy?
A logical error where comparisons are made without specifying what is being compared, or when important aspects of the comparison are omitted to make one thing appear better or worse.
What are the key elements to look for in a Complete Comparison fallacy?
- Missing comparison criteria
- Omitted relevant differences
- Unstated assumptions
- Incomplete context
- Selective information
What are some everyday examples of Complete Comparison fallacy?
- “This car is better.” (Better in what way?)
- “Product X is superior to Product Y.” (In what aspects?)
- “Living in cities is worse.” (Worse than what? In what ways?)
- “Our service is improved.” (Compared to what? How?)
How can you avoid making Complete Comparison fallacies?
- Specify exact criteria being compared
- Include relevant context
- Acknowledge limitations
- Consider all important factors
- Use measurable metrics when possible
What phrases often signal a Complete Comparison fallacy?
“Better than…”
- “Superior to…”
- “Worse than…”
- “Improved…”
- Any comparison without specific criteria
What is an Instant Comparison fallacy?
A logical error where someone draws conclusions based on quick, superficial similarities between two things while ignoring crucial differences that make the comparison invalid.
What are the main characteristics of Instant Comparison?
- Quick, surface-level comparisons
- Ignoring crucial differences
- Oversimplified conclusions
- Emotional rather than logical basis
- Lack of deeper analysis
What are some typical examples of Instant Comparison?
- “Running a country is just like running a business”
- “The human brain is exactly like a computer”
- “Raising children is just like training pets”
- “The economy is like a household budget”
What phrases often signal an Instant Comparison fallacy?
- “It’s just like…”
- “It’s the same as…”
- “If X can do it, why can’t Y?”
- “It’s no different than…”
- “Think of it as…”
How can you avoid making Instant Comparison fallacies?
- Analyze deeper relationships
- Consider context and complexity
- Identify crucial differences
- Question surface similarities
- Take time for thorough comparison
What is the Proof by Repetition fallacy?
A logical error where a claim is considered true simply because it has been repeated many times, rather than because of actual evidence or logical reasoning.
Why does Proof by Repetition often work psychologically?
- Familiarity breeds acceptance
- Repeated exposure increases believability
- Memory becomes stronger with repetition
- People confuse familiarity with truth
- Cognitive ease increases with exposure
Where is Proof by Repetition commonly used?
- Advertising and marketing
- Political campaigns
- Propaganda
- Social media
- Conspiracy theories
- Brand messaging
What are the indicators of Proof by Repetition?
- Constant repetition of claims
- Lack of supporting evidence
- Emotional rather than logical appeals
- Simplified slogans or catchphrases
- Resistance to questioning or verification
How can you protect yourself against Proof by Repetition?
- Always ask for evidence
- Question repeated claims
- Look for original sources
- Evaluate logical arguments
- Consider alternative viewpoints
What is the Mind Projection Fallacy?
The error of confusing the properties of your mental models with properties of the real world, assuming that the way you think about something is the way it actually exists in reality.
What are the main signs of Mind Projection Fallacy?
- Treating mental models as reality
- Confusing maps with territories
- Assuming personal perception equals truth
- Mistaking subjective for objective
- Projecting human concepts onto nature
What are some everyday examples of Mind Projection Fallacy?
- “Time flows like a river” (projecting human experience onto time)
- “Nature abhors a vacuum” (attributing human preferences to nature)
- “The market wants…” (treating abstractions as real entities)
- “Numbers exist in reality” (confusing mathematical models with reality)
How can you avoid the Mind Projection Fallacy?
- Recognize models as tools, not reality
- Distinguish map from territory
- Question assumptions about “natural” or “obvious” truths
- Consider multiple perspectives
- Acknowledge subjective elements in thinking
Who identified the Mind Projection Fallacy and why is it important?
E.T. Jaynes identified it in physics, showing how scientists sometimes confused their mathematical models with physical reality. It’s important because it helps us distinguish between our mental constructs and objective reality.
What is the “Proving Too Much” fallacy?
A logical error where an argument, if accepted, would prove not only the intended conclusion but also other conclusions that are clearly false or unacceptable, indicating the original argument is flawed.
How can you identify when an argument “proves too much”?
- Apply the same logic to similar situations
- Check if it leads to absurd conclusions
- Test if it proves known falsehoods
- See if it contradicts accepted truths
- Examine if it undermines itself
