Informal Fallacies (Exam 2 PHIL 112) Flashcards
Begging the Question (A)
one premise assumes the truth of the conclusion.
(The Dodgers are the best team because there just isn’t anyone better.)
False Dilemma/ Alternative/ Dichotomy (A)
“OR statement is wrong”
one of its premises asserts or assumes that only two
alternatives exist when in fact there exist more than the two
(Either you stand for the anthem or you are
traitor. Since you don’t stand for the anthem, you must be a traitor.)
False Cause (G)
“correlation does not equal causation”
two events are causally related when there is at best insufficient evidence to establish such a relation. This is sometimes called post hoc, ergo propter hoc.
(The Patriots won the Super Bowl after 9/11. Hence, the Patriots won the Super Bowl because of 9/11.)
Faulty Analogy (G)
“not enough similarity between A and B of analogy”
the analogy drawn is insufficiently strong to support its conclusion.
(Dogs are warm-blooded, nurse their young, and give birth to puppies. Humans are warm-blooded and nurse their young. Therefore, humans give birth to puppies.)
Hasty Generalization (G)
draws a general conclusion based on an insufficient
number of cases.
(Several NFL players have been guilty of violent crimes in recent years. Can you believe
it? It’s just a league full of criminals.)
Straw Man (R)
“characterizations that are misrepresentations”
one argues against a position that is relatively easy to defeat and that appears to be
that of one’s opponent, but is in fact not.
(Senator Hilltop opposes the latest welfare bill because she says it’s too costly. But anyone who is indifferent child poverty can’t be right, so her opposition to the bill is
wrong.)
Appeal to the Person (R)
“bullying of character is unrelated to conclusion”
attacks the character of the arguer in order to make critical claims about the arguer’s conclusion.
(Clinton is a liberal elite, so of course her economic policies won’t help ordinary
people.)
can also be a positive appeal
Guilt by Association (R)
associates the conclusion of the opponent’s position, or the opponent themselves, with an unsavory group or person in order to discredit the conclusion or opponent
(Fascists are anti-
immigration, so being anti-immigration is wrong and fascistic.)
*can also be virtue by association; positive
Appeal to Ignorance (R)
“not enough evidence is NOT proof”
an attempt to derive a positive conclusion from a lack of evidence or knowledge, which does not provide evidence for the conclusion. Nor does the
inability to prove a conclusion provide evidence against the conclusion.
(No one has proven that election fraud did not occur in the last presidential election, so we need tighter voting laws to keep it from happening again.)
Appeal to Popularity/ Masses (R)
“everyone agrees does not mean it is true”
Claims that a conclusion is true on the basis that it is widely believed to be true.
(Since so many people really feel and believe that angels are watching over them, angels must be real.)
Appeal to Tradition (R)
“always having done something does not mean it is true”
maintains that a conclusion is true on the basis that it is a part of established
tradition.
(For ages we have been using chicken soup to treat colds. It therefore must be effective.)
Appeal to Emotion (R)
(Fear, Pity, Envy, Guilt, Hope…)
Argues for a conclusion by trying to scare us into it.
(If you don’t believe in God,
you’ll go to hell! or If you believe in God, you’ll go to heaven.)
can appeal to other emotions, including positive ones
Appeal to Authority (R)
“false/ irrelevant authority”
Attempts to draw support for a conclusion based on the authority of someone who believes it, even when this authority is irrelevant to the issue at hand.
(Bill Nye the Science Guy says climate change is real, so I don’t take too seriously people who claim it’s a hoax.)
Equivocation (R)
“same word– 2 meanings”
Uses the same word in two different senses to draw its conclusion.
(It is important to fight for what you believe is right. Since you disagree with me, we’re going to have to take
this outside.)
Composition (R)
“true parts does not mean true whole”
Claims that what is true of the parts is also true of the whole. (Subatomic particles are lifeless. I am made of subatomic particles. Therefore, I must be lifeless.)
