Logic 3 Flashcards
The arguer attempts to support a conclusion by merely evoking pity from the reader
Appeal to pity or argumentum ad misericordiam
The conclusion of an argument depends on the fact that a word or phrase is used
Equivocation
Because the parts have a certain attribute it follows that the whole must have it
Composition
Either or statement with two unlikely alternatives
False dichotomy
From whole to parts. The conclusion depends on the transference of an attribute from a whole or a class onto its parts
Division
The authority may lack credibility
Appeal to unqualified authority or argumentum ad verecundiam
Incapable of being proved or not yet proved so it’s dismissed
Appeal to ignorance or argumentum ad ignorantiam
Uses desires like love esteem and value to get the reader to accept conclusion
Appeal to the people/ argumentum ad populum
Reasonable likelihood that the sample is not the representative group
Hasty generalization
Distorts the opponents argument for the purpose of more easily attacking it, and concludes the opponents real argument has been distorted
Straw man
When a general rule is applied to a specific case it wasn’t intended to cover
Accident
Whenever the arguer poses a conclusion and tells that person that some harm will come unless they accept the conclusion
Appeal to force or argumentum ad baculum
Involves two arguers. One advances a certain argument. The other responds by directing his or her attention to the first person instead of the argument.
Argument against the person or argumentum ad hominem
Arguer diverts the attention of the reader or listener by changing the subject. Sometimes in a closely related way
Red herring
Irrelevant. When the premises go with one conclusion then a different conclusion is drawn
Missing the point ignoratio elenchi
Argument depends on analogy. Analogy isn’t strong enough to support conclusion.
Weak analogy
Conclusion of the argument leads to chain reactions and there’s no reason to think it can happen.
Slippery slope
The link between the premises and conclusion depends on some imagines causal connection that probably doesn’t exist
False cause.
Argumentum ad verecundiam
Appeal to unqualified authority
Argumentum ad ignorantiam
Appeal to ignorance
Jane is in favor of increased safety inspections for planes. But Jane is the owner of a safety company & would beg millions if this new regulation went into law. Therefore there is no reason to increase inspections.
Argumentum ad hominem
Obviously Rolex watches are the best! Look how few people can afford them!
Argumentum ad populum
We should always respect people’s personal property. Therefore you should give that psychotic man his knife.
Accident
So many people are on welfare. Therefore welfare must cause property.
False cause.
Chickens are small, flightless birds and Americans love to eat them. Penguins are also small, flightless birds. Therefore Americans probably also love to eat penguins.
Weak analogy
If we defund education, then our society will crumble. But we didn’t defund education. Thus our society will not not crumble after all!
Denying the antecedent
If I study then I pass. I passed the test. Therefore I must have studied
Affirming the consequent
Florida is a tropical state. Therefore many states must be tropical.
Hasty generalization
Alex is in favor of vegetarianism. But I don’t think it is right to say that humans are no better than animals. This sort of thinking totally undermines humans. Therefore Alex is wrong in his beliefs
Straw man.
You can’t prove that God doesn’t exist. Therefore it is reasonable to believe in God
Argumentum ad ignorantiam
