Final Exam Flashcards
Genetic Fallacy
Arguing that a claim is true or false solely because of its origin
ex. Selenas argument regarding aboriginal rights is no good, because she is of Latina descent.
Ad Hominem fallacy
“To the person”
Criticizing the person making the claim, not the claim itself
ex. 1993 PC ad attacking the way Chertien speaks
Tu Quoque fallacy
“You also”
Thinks the argument is defeated by accusing the arguer of hypocrisy
ex. Al Gore argues we must reduce our carbon footprint, but he had an enormous one
Poisoning the well fallacy
Attempting to discredit a person by saying something in advance that will cause everything the person says to be discounted
Fallacy of Composition
One commits the fallacy of composition when one argues that what is true of the parts of something must be true of the whole thing
ex. One beer can’t get you drunk, so 24 can’t get you drunk
Fallacy of Division
One commits the fallacy of division when one argues that what is true of the whole must be true of the parts of the thing
ex. Kim is pretty, so every particle making her up is pretty
Fallacy of equivocation
One equivocates when one uses a word in two senses in different premises of an argument
ex. pizza is better than nothing (1) (ie. Having nothing), and nothing (2) (ie. Not one thing) is better than sex, so pizza is better than sex
Fallacy of appeal to popularity
Arguing a claim must be true merely because a substantial number of people believe it
ex. most Canadians believe in the monarchy, so it must be good
Fallacy of appeal to tradition
Arguing that a claim must be true just because its part of a tradition
ex. women shouldn’t be allowed to vote, because they never have
Appeal to ignorance
Arguing that a lack of evidence proves something
ex. Biologists have searched for Bigfoot and never found him, so he probably doesn’t exist
Burden of proof
If someone had the burden of proof, then someone has the responsibility for providing proof for their claim
ex. “animal emotions do not exist,” is a claim that must be based on reasons. The default position is not that animal emotions don’t exist, not that they do
Fallacy of illicit appeal to emotion
The use of emotions as premises in an argument. Consists of trying to persuade someone of a conclusion solely by arousing their feelings, rather than presenting relevant reasons
Red Herring fallacy
Raising of an irrelevant issue during an argument in order to change the subject
ex. The Premiers tax policies should be popular, but I suspect he had an affair. The media should investigate that
Straw person fallacy
Occurs when someone distorts, weakens or oversimplifies someone’s position so that it can be more easily attacked or refuted
ex. Obama believes Reagan was transformative in uniting people, Clinton says Obama said he liked Reagans ideas
Unacceptable premise fallacies
Mistakes of reasoning where the conclusion is supported by a premise that is unacceptable
Fallacy of begging the question
Trying to prove a conclusion true by using that conclusion as a premise. P therefore P.
ex. Elmo is in jail, and innocent people aren’t in jail, so Elmo is guilty
False dilemma fallacy
Asserts that there are only two alternatives to consider in some issue when there are actually more than two
Ex. When the president states “every person has a dilemma in this nation, you are either with us, or you are against us
Asserts that there are two mutually exclusive alternatives, which in fact may not be mutually exclusive
Ex. Either the child knows how to make the right decision, or the parents raised her properly. But it is possible the parents raised her properly but this decision is too difficult to make on her own
The slippery slope fallacy
Arguing without good reasons, that taking a particular step will inevitably lead to a further, undesirable step
Fallacy of hasty generalization
When a conclusion is made about a whole group based in an inadequate sample of the group
ex. deciding based on two reviews of a product on amazon
Fallacy of illicit appeal to authority
When we accept a claim from someone deemed an expert or authority on an issue who is not an expert on the issue
Inductive argument
Strong/weak is a matter of degree: very strong, strong, weak, very weak
Strong if it is true
Weak if it is invalid
Cogent vs. Non-cogent
All true premises and inductively strong reasoning= a cogent argument
Enumerative induction
Some forms of induction reason from individual members of a group to conclusions about all members of the group
Ex. 12/12 squirrels we studied love nuts, so probably all squirrels love nuts.
Probabilistic reasoning
probability values range from 0-1
0= the lowest degree of probability, totally false
1= the highest degree of probability, totally true
0.5= equally likely and unlikely
