Fallacies

Question 1

APPEAL TO FORCE
(Argumentum ad Baculum)

(ii) Give and Example
(iii) Why is this reasoning Fallacious

Answer 1

To appeal force or the threat of force in order to make somone accept a conclsuion.

They may not understand and belive the concusion but will behave as if they do to avoid the threat.

(iii) It is Fallacious becuse beliving in the Conclusion isn’t based of the truth/stregnth of the premises but the fear of force.. It is not a step twords turth.

Question 2

AD HOMINEM ARGUMENTS
(General)

(ii) Give and Example
(iii) Why is this reasoning Fallacious

Answer 2

Attacks aspects of the arguer to undermine the agures point, instead of attacking the arguement itself. Not to be confused with insults.

Sometimes it can matter, perhaps if a doctor has accidentally killed a lot of people (way above average) he should not be giving medical advice.

Is Latin for “against the man” or “against the person”.

Question 3

Tu Quoque
(Type of AD HOMINEM ARGUMENT)

(ii) Give and Example
(iii) Why is this reasoning Fallacious

Answer 3

(A sub type of a Fallacie)

To reject a person’s claims when it is inconsistent with something else they have said or way they have behaved

Question 4

A circumstantial Ad Hominem
(Type of AD HOMINEM ARGUMENT)

(ii) Give and Example
(iii) Why is this reasoning Fallacious

Answer 4

Attempts to discredit a claim by arguing that a person only has a certin argument becuse of their own Vested Intertest.

The reality is interests and circumstances have no bearing on the truth or falsity of the claim.

But it is still important to sometimes be suspicious of a person’s motives for making a claim,

Question 5

A personal attack
(Type of AD HOMINEM ARGUMENT)

(ii) Give and Example
(iii) Why is this reasoning Fallacious

Answer 5

To attack the character of the arguer based off one of their aspects (usally said as a term with a negative impact).

It may be true, but it dosn’t it follow that what they say is false.

Question 6

Appeal to Authority
(Argumentum ad Verecundiam)

(ii) Give and Example
(iii) Why is this reasoning Fallacious

Answer 6

Uses the claims of an authority on facts that aren’t credible to an argument to give it better credibility.

But people do accept things on the authority of experts, and they are often right to do so.

(iii) Becuse using other peoples name as a premise does not stregethen the argument

Question 7

Argument from Tradition
(Argumentum ad Antiquitatem)

(ii) Give and Example
(iii) Why is this reasoning Fallacious

Answer 7

Uses tradition and the “way things have always been done” as a premise for why a conclusion is true.

Is to claim that, because people have done or believed something for along time, it is true.

(iii) Becuse the evidents it introducies is the ocnclusion its self.

Question 8

APPEAL TO MAJORITY/BAND-WAGON ARGUMENTS
(Argumentum ad Populam)

(ii) Give and Example
(iii) Why is this reasoning Fallacious

Answer 8

To believe a conclusion based on the fact that a majority believes it. Using popular belief to justifie.

Becuse a a desirable group of people, accept or adopt it.

(iii) Becuse majoritys belife don’t gaurrntee truth

Question 9

THE “STRAW MAN” FALLACY

(ii) Give and Example
(iii) Why is this reasoning Fallacious

Answer 9

Intentionally bad presentation of someone’s argument.

To set up a weakened version by misrepresentation, exaggeration, distortion or simplification of a argument

Inverts the rule and applies the ‘Principle of Uncharity’.
(iii) Becuse this does not insure we are doing our best to arrive at truth.

Question 10

ARGUMENT FROM IGNORANCE/APPEAL TO IGNORANCE
(Argumentum ad Ignorantium)

(ii) Give and Example
(iii) Why is this reasoning Fallacious

Answer 10

To argue that something is true because it has not been disproved.
Uses a lack of evidence for the opposing proposition

(iii) the person holding the claim should also be responsible for the evidence of the argument.

Question 11

STEEL MAN

not a fallacy

Answer 11

Good presentation of someone’s argument.
Useing the Principle of Charity
(not a fallacy)

Question 12

ARGUMENT FROM FALSE CAUSE/ POST HOC
(Post hoc ergo propter hoc)

(ii) Give and Example
(iii) Why is this reasoning Fallacious

Answer 12

Linking two seperate unrealted causes in attampt to prove a conclusion,

To claim that certain events are true due to other events (that aren’t actually related or true)

(iii) Becuse to link unrelated items in a premise does not provide sound content that can justifiably be used to affrim the conclusion.

Question 13

FALLACIES OF AMBIGUITY/ EQUIV0CATION

(ii) Give and Example
(iii) Why is this reasoning Fallacious

Answer 13

An argument contains ambiguous words whose meanings change in the course of the argument.

Words or phrases can be interpreted in different ways. The connotation of words can change the shape of the argument.

(iii) this is bad becuse its either mis-comunication or somone manipulating conitations to ensure their objective. Both ways destort the arguments ablity to arrive at truth.

Question 14

FALSE DICHOTOMY/FALSE DILEMMA

(ii) Give and Example
(iii) Why is this reasoning Fallacious

Answer 14

To make it seem like there are fewer possibilities
than there really.

In real life, there is often room in the middle.

Presents a limited set of choices as though they are the only ones, when there may be others.

(iii) To Limit truth to only two possiblites when there could be more stops it from being truth.

Question 15

BEGGING THE QUESTION/CIRCULAR ARGUMENT
(Petitio Principii)

(ii) Give and Example
(iii) Why is this reasoning Fallacious

Answer 15

An argument’s conclusion is included within a premise in a disguised way,

Using the proposition or conclusion in the premises to justify the very same conclussion.

Bound to appear valid but is not.

(iii) The Truth of the conclusion can’t come from the conclusion its self.

Question 16

APPEAL TO THE CONSEQUENCE
(-OF HOLDING A BELIEF)

(ii) Give and Example
(iii) Why is this reasoning Fallacious

Answer 16

For ther to be a sort of consequence if a conclusion is not accepted.

Can take the form of wishful thinking.

(iii) Wanting or not wanting a certin conclusion shouldn’t effect weather or not that conclusion is true.

Question 17

FALLACY OF COMPOSITION/DIVERSION

(ii) Give and Example
(iii) Why is this reasoning Fallacious

Answer 17

Is true of the whole, from the fact that it is true of the parts.

Unrtional connection from the turth of parts to the truth of the conclution

Sometimes to have correct premises or correct parts, but to infer a incorrect conclusion.

What is true of somthing, must also be true of parts.

(e. g)(ii) “Oxygen isn’t wet. Hydrogen isn’t wet. So, water isn’t wet!”
(iii) Becuse the Premise are gurteering a truth, but it isn’t the truth of the conclusion as there isn’t any correlation.

Question 18

FALLACY FALLACY/ ARGUMENT FROM FALLACY

(ii) Give and Example
(iii) Why is this reasoning Fallacious

Answer 18

Mistake of inferring that, just because an
argument contains a fallacy, it’s conclusion is false.

(iii) Becuse a conclusion can still be correct if the Premises are wrong and fallacious- it just means its a bad argument but not nessarly wrong.

Question 19

Slippery slope

(ii) Give and Example
(iii) Why is this reasoning Fallacious

Answer 19

Sliding from one relatively likely event to progressively less and less likely events in ways that make the casual chain seem inevitable.

(iii) Becuse unlikely sub-conculsions are being formed- which are then used as a premise for the main conclusion.

Question 20

Genetic Fallacy

(ii) Give and Example
(iii) Why is this reasoning Fallacious

Answer 20

Assessing the truth of a claim by its origin of history, as opposed to its relevance.

Exception: At times, the origin of the claim is relevant to the truth of the claim.

(iii) Orgin is irrelevant to the claim and should be assed on its own.

Question 21

Hasty generalization

(ii) Give and Example
(iii) Why is this reasoning Fallacious

Answer 21

Draws a general conclusion on the basis of insufficient evidence.

This is where negative stereotypes can come from.

(iii) Using insufficent evidence in premise lead to premise not guaranteeing the truth of the conculsuion.

Question 22

Red Herring

(ii) Give and Example
(iii) Why is this reasoning Fallacious

Answer 22

(Hunter used a smoke fish to distract the rabbit from his sent)
Changing what the issue in an argument is to distract from the current issue at hand.

(iii) Becuse it leads the conversation away from the pursuit of truth.

Question 23

Loaded question

(ii) Give and Example
(iii) Why is this reasoning Fallacious

Answer 23

Asks a question informed by implicit assumptions.
“Hello bill. Say, are you still an alcoholic ?”
Its adds a false assumption into the question limiting your choice.

(iii) Becuse this distorts the truth of the conclusion by attaching a flase asumtion to it.

Question 24

Moving The Goalposts

(ii) Give and Example
(iii) Why is this reasoning Fallacious

Answer 24

Raising the standard of evidence after adequate evidence has already been presented.
Changing how much evidence you need in order to disprove the opposition’s conclusion.

(iii) Becuse you are stoping a conclsuion from being able to be faslibifable- if it can’t ever be proved wrong (becuse of criteria) it can’t be proved right.

Question 25

No true Scotsman/ Appeal to purity

(ii) Give and Example
(iii) Why is this reasoning Fallacious

Answer 25

Setting up criteria for a certain argument, then redefining the criteria to exclude certain outcomes.

(iii) By excluding factors- you run the possiblity also exclusing the truth.