1. Lessons in Logic
Session 2

2. Association fallacies
Section 1B
Association fallacies

3. Guilt by Association
Creation of a fallacious link between one person, group, or idea and another in order to discredit it.
An effective political tactic.
McCarthyism
Disagreeing with President Obama is tied to racism, tying those with political differences to those who have an irrational hatred on the basis of race
Linking Christian Fundamentalists to Islamic Fundamentalists through their Fundamentalism could be considered a Guilt by Association Fallacy depending on how it is presented. It is also an example of Equivocation, which we’ll discuss under “False Assumption” fallacies.

4. Guilt by Association Guilt by Association in Theology:
Amillennialism is wrong because it’s the eschatology of Roman Catholicism
The Pharisees dismissed Jesus because he ate with sinners.

5. Transfer
The attempt to transfer your positive feelings about one thing to another, unrelated thing.
Very common in advertising.

6. Examples of Transfer Marlboro: Rugged, masculine, calm
Diet Coke: “30 years”, implies childhood father, good memories
Romney: American flag behind invokes a sense of patriotism and national pride, implying that Romney would be the ideal leader for America

7. Failed example of Transfer
From Wikipedia:
On September 13, 1988 Dukakis visited the General Dynamics Land Systems plant in Sterling Heights, Michigan to take part in a photo op in an M1 Abrams tank. The Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, Margaret Thatcher, had been photographed in a similar situation in 1986, riding in a Challenger tank while wearing a scarf.[1] Compared with Dukakis' results, Thatcher's picture was very successful and helped her reelection prospects.[2] Footage of Dukakis was used in television ads by the Bush campaign, as evidence that Dukakis would not make a good commander-in-chief, and "Dukakis in the tank" remains shorthand for backfired public relations outings. Although he had served in the United States Army, Dukakis was widely mocked by his opponents for what they characterized as martial posturing and a silly image.

8. Reductio ad Hitlerum/ Argumentum ad Hitlerum
The “Nazi Card”
Attempts to discredit a premise because it can be associated with Adolf Hitler and/or the Nazi Party.
Example: Hitler was known to love animals, and had several dogs. To suggest that owning dogs makes one a Nazi would be to commit “Argumentum ad Hitlerum.”
The “Pharisee Card” is a virtually identical fallacy.
Can also be classified as a Genetic Fallacy, or an Ad Hominem Fallacy,

9. Section 2
False assumptions

10. Circular Reasoning The original premise is the final conclusion
Example: Rock layers are dated by the fossils they contain, and the fossils are dated by the rock layers they’re found in.

11. Begging the Question
The original premise is assumed in the final conclusion
Similar to Circular Reasoning
Some consider them the same fallacy
Distinction is assumption vs. assertion
Examples from Creation/Evolution Debate*
“The Bible cannot be true because it contains miracles, and miracles violate the laws of nature.”
“It makes no sense to deny evolution, it is a well-established fact of nature.”
“The Bible must be the Word of God because it says it is, and what it says must be true because God cannot lie.”
“We know evolution is true because we are here.”
*Answers in Genesis article, see: ezmin.us/begtheq
Dr. Jason Lisle of Answers in Genesis led an astronomy observation session with members of the public. During the session, he asked a 4 year old boy if he believed in alien spaceships. The boy said he did. Dr. Lisle asked why he believed in alien spaceships. The boy replied “How else would the aliens get here?”
Valid argument that begs the question:
Without logic, we could not formulate a valid argument.
We can make valid arguments
Therefore: there must be laws of logic.
Valid because it is not arbitrary. The existence of logic is self-evident.

12. Equivocation
Juxtaposing two or more uses of a word or symbol with different meanings, implying that they have the same meaning.
Leveraging ambiguity in order to mislead.
“Ambiguity” on the Your Fallacy Is chart.

13. Equivocation Example (from Wikipedia): Examples from theology:
Margarine is better than nothing.
Nothing is better than butter.
Therefore, Margarine is better than butter.
Examples from theology:
Word of Faith movement equivocates over the word “Faith”, which they describe as a force, rather than trust.
“There’s power in the blood…”
Used often by the cults
Insist that terms are defined
Very common tactic of the cults.
Eric: Indwelling of the spirit; spatial vs. relational.

14. Loaded Question
A question that presumes the conclusion. Puts the person being asked in a tricky situation, whereby no matter how they answer, they appear to forfeit ground in the debate.
Commonly used by “hard-hitting” television talking heads such as Bill O’Reilly and Piers Morgan to convey the appearance of superior intellect & debating skills.
Examples:
Have you stopped beating your wife?
“Where does the US Constitution say that same-sex couples can’t get married?*”
* Piers Morgan asked this of Ryan Anderson of the Heritage Foundation in a show discussing this topic on March 26, 2013
The way to respond to this fallacy is to address the underlying, faulty presupposition that motivates it. Never grant that presupposition.

15. Composition & Division
Composition falsely assumes that what is true of the parts is also true of the whole.
Example: Every track of a CD is 10 minutes long, therefore the entire CD is 10 minutes long1.
Division falsely assumes that what is true of the whole is also true of the parts.
Examples:
A particular brick wall is fragile, therefore the bricks that make up the wall are fragile1.
1Source: example from this fallacy are from the “Fallacy Friday” podcast available at apologetics315.com
Common example of Composition: In the Cosmological argument for the existence of God, it is said that everything in the universe has a beginning, therefore the universe itself had to have a beginning. Maybe it did, but this line of reasoning is fallacious.

16. False Dichotomy/False Dilemma
Assumes only two available options, when there are actually more
Often pits one extreme against the other
Anarchy vs. Totalitarianism
Republican vs. Democrat
Pelagianism vs. Hyper-Calvinism
Example: John 9:2-3 says “And His disciples asked Him, ‘Rabbi, who sinned, this man or his parents, that he would be born blind?’ Jesus answered, ‘It was neither that this man sinned, nor his parents; but it was so that the works of God might be displayed in him.”
Opposite of “Middle Ground” Fallacy

17. Middle Ground Argument to moderation
Proposes more than two options when only two are available.
Wife wants a baby, husband does not; a mediator proposes having half a baby.
Examples:
The claim that all religions have grains of truth and all paths lead to God.
The Hegelian Dialectic; Thesis, Antithesis, & Synthesis
Opposite of “False Dichotomy”
Law of Excluded Middle

18. Etymology Fallacy Similar to Equivocation
Meaning of words has changed, but assumed to still have the same meaning
Examples from the US Constitution:
Militia (2nd Amendment):
Late 18th Century: All able-bodied male citizens
Early 21st Century: The National Guard
Regulate (Commerce Clause):
Late 18th Century: To make regular (uniform)
Early 21st Century: To enact restrictions

19. Argument from Fallacy AKA: The Fallacy Fallacy
Assumes that because an argument is fallacious, the conclusion must be false.
People often come to the correct conclusion, but get there through bad reasoning.
Faulty reasoning does not invalidate the correct conclusion.
Example: All horses are animals. Mr. Ed was an animal. Therefore, Mr. Ed was a horse.

20. Statistical fallacies & Propaganda
Next Week:
Statistical fallacies & Propaganda