POL & 7Sage Flaws List Flashcards
Ad Hominem Fallacy
Involves attacking the person who makes the argument instead of attacking the argument itself
- Mainly used to distract from the argument
- Can be subtle; attempts to discredit by suggesting that the author’s argument is wack b/c of a factor of the author’s circumstances (but the soundness of the argument is independent of the person’s circumstances)
Example: Jones argues for vegetarianism. He says it’s wrong to kill animals unless you really need them for food. But Jones is just a nerdy intellectual. So we can safely conclude that vegetarianism remains what it has always been–nonsense.
Tu Quoque (Ad Hominem)
An attempt to undermine an argument or view by suggesting that one’s opponent is hypocritical (goes against his own practice or what he has previously said)
Straw Man Fallacy
Arguer attacks a misrepresentation of the opponent’s view.
Breakdown:
Premise – A misrepresentation of the view is false.
Conclusion–The view is false
Example: Susan advocates the legalization of cocaine. But I cannot agree with any position based on the assumption that cocaine is good for you and that a society of drug addicts can flourish. So, I disagree with Susan.
Appeal to Force Fallacy
Occurs when a conclusion is defended by a threat to the well-being of those who do not accept it. (threat may be explicit or implict)
Appeal to the People
An attempt to persuade a person or group by appealing to the desire to be accepted or valued by others.
Example: Ms. Sanchez, are you saying that President Bush made a moral error when he decided to go to war with Iraq? I can’t believe my ears. That’s not how Americans feel. Not true Americans, anyway. You are an American, aren’t you Ms. Sanchez?
Appeal to Pity Fallacy
An attempt to support a conclusion merely by evoking pity in one’s audience. Generally not very subtle.
Appeal to Ignorance Fallacy
Involves one of the following:
Either (a) the claim that a statement is true (or may be reasonably believed true) simply because it hasn’t been proven false or (b) the claim that a statement is false just because it hasn’t been proven true
Examples:
- After centuries of trying, no one has been able to prove that reincarnation occurs. So, at this point, I think we can safely conclude that reincarnation does not occur.
- After centuries of trying, no one has been able to show that reincarnation does not occur. Therefore, reincarnation occurs.
Red Herring Fallacy
Occurs whenever the premises of an argument are logically unrelated to the conclusion. Typical example involves one where the premises focus on the topic of discussion but the conclusion is irrelevant to that topic. Instead of continuing on to the natural conclusion that follows from the premises, the red herring introduces a new idea.
Example: There is a good deal of talk these days about the need to eliminate pesticides from our fruit and vegetables. But many of these foods are essential to our health. Carrots are an excellent source of vitamin A, broccoli is rich in iron and oranges are high in vitamin C.
Equivocation Fallacy
Occurs when multiple meanings of a word (or phrase) are used in a context where validity requires a single meaning of that word.
Example: Only man is rational. But no woman is a man. Hence, no woman is rational.
Amphiboly Fallacy
Occurs when multiple meanings of a sentence are used in a context where (a) validity requires a single meaning and (b) the multiple meanings are due to sentence structure (rather than the meaning of some words or phrases)
Example: One morning I shot an elephant in my pajamas. How he got into my pajamas I’ll never know.
Composition Fallacy
Involves either (a) an invalid inference from the nature of the parts to the nature of the whole or (b) an invalid inference from attributes of members of a group to attributes of the group itself
Example: Each of the parts of this airplane is very light. Therefore, the airplane itself is very light.
Each player on the football team is outstanding. Hence, the team itself is outstanding.
Division Fallacy
It involves either (a) an invalid inference from the nature of the whole to the nature of the parts or (b) an invalid inference from the nature of a group to the nature of its members
Example: The soccer team is excellent. Hence, each member of the team is excellent.
Begging the Question
Occurs when an argument assumes the point to be proven. (also known as arguing in a circle)
Example: The defendant is not guilty of the crime, for she is innocent of having committed it.
False Dilemma
Occurs when one uses a premise that unjustifiably reduces the number of alternatives to be considered.
For example, the arguer may assume, without justification, that there are only two possible alternatives, when in fact there are three or more.
(The argument presupposes that there are only two options)
Example; I’m tired of all these young people criticizing their own country. What i say is this, “America–love it or leave it!” And since these people obviously don’t want to leave the country, they should love it instead of criticizing it.
Appeal to Unreliable Authority Fallacy
This is an appeal to an authority when the reliability of that authority may be reasonably doubted.
When this fallacy is made, the arguer assumes–without sufficient warrant–that the authority in question is reliable.
Example: Football player says that Cinnamon Toast Crunch is a nutritional breakfast cereal. So, Cinnamon Toast Crunch is a nutritional breakfast cereal.
False Cause Fallacy (Post hoc, ergo propter hoc)
Occurs when one possible cause of a phenomenon is assumed to be a (or the) cause although reasons are lacking for excluding other possible causes.
Post hoc, ergo proper hoc: “After this, therefore because of this.” Most common form. This form of the false cause fallacy occurs whenever an arguer illegitimately assumes that because event X preceded event Y, X caused Y.
Example: Since I came into the office two years ago, the rate of violent crime has decreased significantly. So, it is clear that the longer prison sentences we recommended are working.
Example two: The best professional athletes receive big salaries. therefore, in order to guarantee that Smith will become one of the best professional athletes, we should give him a big salary.
Slippery Slope Fallacy
Another false cause fallacy. This fallacy occurs when the arguer assumes that a chain reaction will occur but there is insufficient evidence that one (or more) events in the chain will cause the others.
Example: Never buy a lottery ticket. People who buy lottery tickets soon find that they want to gamble on horses. Next, they develop a strong urge to go to Las Vegas and bet their life savings in the casinos. The addiction to gambling gradually ruins their family life. Eventually, they die, homeless and lonely.
Analogies that aren’t analogous enough
All arguments by analogy fall apart by some point. At some point the two things being analogized lose their relevant similarities and the analogy cannot continue.
Causation Confusions
Whenever the LSAT concludes or assumes that A causes B, 99.9% of the time it’s wrong. They’ll tell you A is correlated with B or that A coincided with B and therefore A caused B.
Maybe. That’s just one possible explanation for the correlation.
Here are 3 other possible explanations:
1) B caused A
2) C causes both A and B
3) A and B are merely coincidentally correlated and really something else, X, caused B.
Confusing necessary and sufficient conditions
Confusing what is necessary for what is sufficient or vice versa
Confusing Probability for Certainty
Could be is NOT MUST BE. Even if something is 99.99% likely to happen, it does not mean that it will happen.
Confusing Probability for Certainty
Could be is NOT MUST BE. Even if something is 99.99% likely to happen, it does not mean that it will happen.
Confusing Is for Ought
Don’t confuse the descriptive for the prescriptive.
Descriptive simply describes the state of the world.
Prescriptive reveals values (also reveals what we care about).
You will typically encounter a descriptive premise leading to a prescriptive conclusion. For example: The house is on fire therefore we should put the fire out.
– Theres many reasons why we wouldn’t want to put the fire out.
We always need a bridge premise to take us from the descriptive world of the premises to the prescriptive world of the conclusion.
Percentages v Quantity
Percentages don’t necessarily reveal quantity and vice versa.
For example: Group A wants a 10% raise and Group B wants a 50% raise. Who will earn more money after? Who is asking for more money? We have no idea based off this information
Surveys and samplings to reach a general conclusion
Remember that surveys and samplings must be random (non-biased). Asking a group of 20 y/o who they’re voting for will only tell you who 20 y/o are voting for, not who the entire country will vote for.
Hasty generalization
Very similar to sampling error. The difference is that the conclusion is very broad. You cannot make a generalization based on small sample size or based on one or two incidents.
Experiments to reach a general conclusion
Experiments to reach a general conclusion must include a control group. It must also establish the baseline of what is measured before the experiment begins.
Your argument fails therefore the opposite of your conclusion must be true
There could be other arguments made to support the failed argument.
Relative v Absolute
A is faster than B, therefore A is fast. Not necessarily so. A is faster than B in relative terms. It doesn’t imply that A is fast in the absolute sense.
Example: Turtles are faster than ants. Therefore turtles are fast.
Tradition fallacy and novelty fallacy
The fact that something is old doesn’t mean that it is right or better. In the same vein, just because things have been done a certain way for a long time doesn’t mean it is right or better.
