Chapter 3- Fallacies

Question 1

Fallacy

Answer 1

A certain kind of defect in an argument (not by having false premises).

Question 2

Fallacious Argument

Answer 2

An argument whose conclusion could be false even if all of its premises were true.

Question 3

What are the two types of fallacies?

Answer 3

1) Formal Fallacy
2) Informal Fallacy

Question 4

Formal Fallacy

Answer 4

A fallacy identified through mere inspection of the form or structure of an argument.

Question 5

What is an example of a formal fallacy?

Answer 5

Denying the antecedent or affirming the consequent.

Question 6

Informal Fallacy

Answer 6

A fallacy that can only be detected through analysis of the content of the argument.

Question 7

What is an example of an informal fallacy?

Answer 7

1) Nothing is better than God.
2) A peanut butter and jelly sandwich is better than nothing.
3) Therefore, A peanut butter and jelly sandwich is better than God.

Question 8

What is the “effect” of an informal fallacy?

Answer 8

The effect of this fallacy is to make a bad argument appear good. Sometimes the motive is to deceive- that’s called a “sophistry”.

Question 9

What are the five groups that we classify informal fallacies into?

Answer 9

1) Fallacies of Relevance
2) Weak Induction
3) Presumption
4) Ambiguity
5) Part/Whole

Question 10

What are the fallacies of relevance?

Answer 10

1) Appeal to Force (Argumentum ad Baculum)
2) Appeal to Pity (Argumentum ad Misericordiam)
3) Appeal to the People (Argumentum ad Populum)
4) Argument against the Person (Argumentum ad Hominem)
5) Accident
6) Straw Man
7) Missing the Point (Ignoratio Elenchi)
8) Red Herring

Question 11

What is a Fallacy of Relevance?

Answer 11

This is a fallacy where the premises are logically irrelevant to the conclusion.

Question 12

Appeal to Force (Argumentum ad Baculum)

Answer 12

A threat of force (or harm) is used to cause acceptance of a conclusion.

Example: A lobbyist threatens a congressman’s re-election campaign unless the congressman agrees with what the lobbyist wants.

Question 13

Appeal to Pity (Argumentum ad Misericordiam)

Answer 13

Pity is used to get a conclusion accepted.

Example: “Oh, officer, I have already had such a bad day- my husband left me, my dog was run over by the ice cream truck- it would be the end of me, if you tell me that I was speeding.”

Question 14

Appeal to the People (Argumentum ad Populum)

Answer 14

An attempt to win popular assent to a conclusion by arousing the emotions and enthusiasms of people rather than by appeal to the relevant facts.

Example: Marc Antony’s speech in Shakespeare’s Julius Caesar.

Question 15

What are the two forms that Argumentum ad Populum can take?

Answer 15

Direct or Indirect

Question 16

What is the effect of a Direct Appeal to the People?

Answer 16

Creates a mob mentality.

Question 17

What is the effect of an Indirect Appeal to the People?

Answer 17

1) Bandwagon Effect
2) Appeal to Vanity
3) Appeal to Snobbery

Question 18

Argument Against the Person (Argumentum ad Hominem)

Answer 18

Attacks the person, not the argument. Involves two arguers.

Question 19

What are the three forms that Argument Against the Person can take?

Answer 19

1) Abusive
2) Circumstantial
3) “You, Too” (Tu Quoque)

Question 20

Abusive Argumentum ad Hominem

Answer 20

Attacks or abuses the person holding the opposing position.

Question 21

Circumstantial Argumentum ad Hominem

Answer 21

Relationship between a person’s beliefs and his or her circumstances (e.g., so-and-so is a Republican so it’s no wonder he believes X)

Question 22

Tu Quoque Argumentum ad Hominem

Answer 22

Saying that the other person is just as bad (e.g., driving).

Question 23

Accident

Answer 23

Applying a general rule to a particular case whose “accidental” circumstances render the rule inapplicable.

Example: Free speech is protected in this country, therefore it is perfectly legal to yell “Fire!” in a crowded movie theatre.

Question 24

Straw Man

Answer 24

When a person exaggerates or misrepresents the opponent’s argument in order to defeat it. Involves to arguers.

Examples: Numerous in philosophy essays or when the NRA claims that the arguments of those who advocate gun-control laws really intend confiscation of all guns.

Question 25

Missing the Point (Ignoratio Elenchi)

Answer 25

An argument purporting to establish a particular conclusion is instead directed to proving a different conclusion.

Example: A prosecutor expounding on the fact that murder is a terrible crime, then concluding that the defendant is guilty.

Question 26

Red Herring

Answer 26

When the arguer diverts the attention of the reader/listener by changing the subject to some totally different issue- then draws a conclusion about this different issue and so claims to have won the argument.

Example: Students are always complaining about the food in the cafeteria. But eating well is important for academic success- study after study has shown that student’s who don’t eat well perform poorly in their classes.

Question 27

Fallacies of Weak Induction

Answer 27

These arguments are fallacies because the connection between premises and conclusion is not strong enough to support the conclusion. There is at least a shred of evidence that is relevant, but isn’t strong enough to persuade a reasonable person.

Question 28

What are the types of Fallacies of Weak Induction?

Answer 28

1) Appeal to Unqualified Authority (Argumentum ad Verecundiam)
2) Appeal to Ignorance (Argumentum ad Ignorantiam)
3) Hasty Generalization
4) False Cause
5) Slippery Slope
6) Weak Analogy

Question 29

Appeal to Unqualified Authority (Argumentum ad Verecundiam)

Answer 29

An authority is appealed to for testimony outside the province of the authority’s special field.

Example: My brother Dan, the philosophy professor, says the roller coaster at the park is safe. So it must be safe.

Question 30

Appeal to Ignorance (Argumentum ad Ignorantiam)

Answer 30

Argues that a proposition is true simply because it has not been proven false, or false because it has not been proved true.

Example: No one has ever seen an alien from another world, so there cannot be any life in our galaxy.

Question 31

Appeal to Ignorance (Argumentum ad Ignorantiam)

Answer 31

Argues that a proposition is true simply because it has not been proven false, or false because it has not been proved true.

Example: No one has ever seen an alien from another world, so there cannot be any life in our galaxy.

Question 32

What are the exceptions to Argumentum ad Ignorantiam?

Answer 32

1) Where qualified researchers have not found any evidence of a thing and they would have if it existed, and
2) In a court of law where a person is innocent until proven guilty.

Question 33

Hasty Generalization

Answer 33

Considering only unusual or atypical cases and generalizing a rule that fits them alone- from particular to general.

Example: I have met three students from SNC, and they all had blue eyes. All the students at that college must have blue eyes.

Question 34

False Cause

Answer 34

The link between premises and conclusion depends on some imagined causal connection that probably doesn’t exist.

Example: The last two times there was a Killeen lecture it snowed heavily. We’ll have to cancel that lecture series if we ever want nicer weather.

Question 35

What are the two types of false cause inductions?

Answer 35

1) Non Causa Pro Causa
2) Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc

Question 36

Non Causa Pro Causa

Answer 36

More general- to mistake what is not the cause of a given effect for its real cause.

Question 37

Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc

Answer 37

An inference that one event is the cause of another from the mere fact that the first occurs earlier than the second.

Question 38

Slippery Slope

Answer 38

A variety of the false cause fallacy; when the conclusion rests on the claim that a certain event will cause a chain reaction leading in the end to some undesirable consequence, yet there is not sufficient reason to think the chain reaction will occur.

Example: The faculty are asking for a coffee machine in the lounge, but if we put in a coffee machine, they’ll next want a microwave oven, then a full-sized range with a convection oven… there’s no room for all these kitchen appliances in the lounge, so we’ll have to turn down this request.

Question 39

Week Analogy

Answer 39

An inductive argument from analogy where the analogy isn’t strong enough to support the conclusion.

Example: Ronaldo is tall, brown-eyes, dark-haired and a fantastic soccer player. Bill is tall, brown-eyes, and dark-haired… so he must be a great soccer player too.

Question 40

Basic structure of an analogical argument:

Answer 40

• Entity A has attributes a, b, c, and z
• Entity B has attributes a, b, and c
• Therefore, entity B has attribute z.

Question 41

Fallacies of Presumption

Answer 41

Arise because the premises presume what they purport to prove.

Question 42

Fallacies of Ambiguity

Answer 42

Arise from the occurrence of some form of ambiguity in either the premises or the conclusion (or both). “Ambiguous” means susceptible to different interpretation in a given context.

Question 43

Part/Whole Fallacies

Answer 43

Where a property of a whole group (or class) is improperly distributed as properties of the individual members of the group (or vice versa).

Question 44

What are the types of Fallacies of Presumption

Answer 44

1) Begging the Question (Petitio Principii)
2) Complex Question
3) False Dichotomy
4) Suppressed Evidence

Question 45

What are the types of Fallacies of Ambiguity?

Answer 45

1) Equivocation
2) Amphiboly

Question 46

What are the types of Part/Whole Fallacies?

Answer 46

1) Composition
2) Division

Question 47

Begging the Question (Petitio Principii)

Answer 47

Assuming as a premise for an argument the conclusion it is intended to prove- often circular. Has two requirements.
1) The argument must be valid.
2) Conceals the questionable character of a key premise (e.g., the premise and conclusion say the same thing in slightly different ways).

Example 1: Clearly, murder is wrong, so euthanasia is morally wrong. [Begs the question: “Is euthanasia a form of murder?”]

Example 2: We can trust our clear and distinct ideas because God exists and isn’t a deceiver. We know God exists and isn’t a deceiver because we can prove that by an argument. That argument is strong because it has premises that are clear and distinct. (Descartes, Meditation III).

Question 48

16) Complex Question

Answer 48

Such questions presuppose that a definite answer has already been given to a prior question that was not asked.

Example: Have you stopped beating your husband yet? [Presumes an answer to: Were you beating your husband?]

Question 49

False Dichotomy

Answer 49

Occurs when one premise of an argument is a disjunction that presents two alternatives as if they were jointly exhaustive- the arguer then eliminates an undesirable alternative in order to establish the other as the conclusion.

Example: [Teenage daughter to mother]: Either you’ll let me go to the dance with Fred, or you don’t love me. I know you love me, so you will let me go to the dance with Fred.

Question 50

Suppressed Evidence

Answer 50

When an arguer ignores evidence that would tend to undermine the premises of an otherwise good argument, causing it to be unsound or uncogent.

Example: It’s a sunny, windless, day at the beach. Must be a great day for a swim. [Ignoring the dorsal fin of a shark swimming right offshore].

Question 51

Equivocation

Answer 51

Arises when the conclusion of an argument depends on using different meanings of a single word or phrase in the same context.

Example 1: The end of a thing is its perfection. Death is the end of life. Thus, death is the perfection of life.

Example 2: A snail is an animal. Therefore, a fast snail is a fast animal.

Question 52

Amphiboly

Answer 52

Arguing from premises whose formulations are ambiguous (indeterminate) because of the loose or awkward way in which words are combined- the arguer misinterprets the ambiguity and draws a conclusion based on the faulty interpretation.

Example: Sign- “NO TRESSPASSING VIOLATORS WILL BE PROSECUTED” (So it must be okay to enter this property).

Question 53

Composition

Answer 53

Arguing that what is true of the parts of a whole (or class) must also be true of the whole itself.

Example: Every student at Smith College is rich, so Smith College must be a rich college.

Question 54

Division

Answer 54

Arguing that what is true of a whole (or class) must also be true of its parts.

Example: Smith College is a rich college, and Jane goes to Smith, so she must be rich, too.