Presentation on theme: "Fallacies What are they?. Definition There are over 100 fallacies They are illogical statements that demonstrate erroneous reasoning (sometimes intended-manipulation/"— Presentation transcript:
Definition There are over 100 fallacies They are illogical statements that demonstrate erroneous reasoning (sometimes intended-manipulation/ or not intended) They’re generally hurtful and distract from the argument Be careful because the fallacy is sometimes very subtle
Fallacies QA 56-58 Hasty Generalization: drawing a conclusion from insufficient evidence Either/Or: creates the false dilemma (binary) by limiting the choice to 2 alternatives when there are more options False Authority (Appeal to an Expert): citing irrelevant information of an expert who isn’t an expert on the issue/subject
Fallacies contd. False Analogy: comparing two disparate things when the comparison is invalid. False Cause: claims that one event leads to another (but the events are unrelated) Slipper Slope: arguments that suggest an event will precipitate the domino effect- ending in inevitable disaster.
Fallacies contd. Ad Hominem: attacking your opponent- their appearance, personal habits or character instead of dealing with the validity of the argument Red Herring: fallacy of distraction which brings up unrelated/irrelevant issues to distract people from the truth.
Fallacies contd. Bandwagon (Appeal to Popularity): basing an argument on a popular belief and using this as proof that it’s valid. Non Sequitur (Irrelevant argument): means “it does not follow”. The conclusion doesn’t follow the premise.
Fallacies contd. Begging the Question or (Circular Reasoning): the supporting reasons restate the claim. The argument paraphrases the same idea w/out evidence.
Fallacies contd. Death by a 1000 Qualifications: making a statement that might be true but using so many qualifiers that it becomes insignificant. Many Questions: asking questions that subtly attacks opponent
Fallacies contd. Oversimplification: using absolute statements that might not be relevant-or presenting overly simplistic explanations when the issues is infinitely complex
Fallacies contd. Appeal to Ignorance: basing an argument on the lack of evidence. Have to present negative evidence to ‘prove’ something. Appeal to Tradition: basing an argument on tradition
Fallacies contd. Protecting the Hypothesis: manipulating/mischaracterizing data to prove a point Fallacy of Omission: conveniently leaving out relevant information that would weaken argument
Fallacies contd. Emotional Appeals: inciting fear, tradition, or pity to manipulate audience’s emotions rather than their reasoning Equivocation/Slanted Language: biasing the reader by using word choices that have multiple connotations to manipulate your point.
Fallacies contd. Straw Man: using the ‘weakest’ points of opponents argument to mischaracterize their position
Your consent to our cookies if you continue to use this website.