LOGICAL FALLACIES

BEGGING THE QUESTION: assuming something to be true that really needs proof.

EX: The unsanitary condition of the slaughter pens is detrimental to health.

EX: This handwriting is hard to read, because it is nearly illegible.

IGNORING THE QUESTION: a question is set up so that argument is shifted to new ground, or an appeal is made to some emotional attitude having nothing to do with the logic of the case.

EX: You should talk about the apartheid philosophy in Africa. Do you know what Americans did to the Indians?

EQUIVOCATION: using the same term with different meanings. (The word law, for instance, cannot be used to mean both natural law and law as established by an authority, in the same argument.)

NON-SEQUITUR: (Latin, literally: “it does not follow”) The conclusion does not follow from the preceding arguments.

EX: Tom does not drink or smoke, so he ought to make a good husband.

FAULTY DILEMMA: the major premise presents a choice that does not exhaust the possibilities.

EX: Better dead then Red.

POST HOC ERGO PROPTER HOC: (“After this, because of this”) It attempts to prove that because a second event followed a first event, the second event was the result of the first.

EX: Every time the Democrats get into office, we have a war. Every time the Republicans get into office, we have a recession.

ARGUMENTUM AD HOMINEM: (“the argument to the man”) Turning from the issue to the character involved.

EX: Smith should not be elected. He just got divorce.

EX: Smith should not be elected. His father is an alcoholic.

EX: Vote for Smith. He’s been married for twenty years, has four children, served in World War II, and attends church every Sunday.

AD MISERICORDIAM: an appeal for sympathy.

EX: Q: Did you steal the money? A: I’m out of work, my family hasn’t eaten in two days, my brother-in-law has just been arrested for stealing a car…

HYPOTHESIS CONTRARY TO FACT: Beginning with a premise that is not necessarily true and then drawing conclusions from it.

EX: If I had not had Mr. Smith for a teacher, I would never have understood algebra.

COMPOSTION: arguing that a group must have the same qualities or characteristics as its members.

EX: Each football player of the all-star team is the best player at his position in the entire country. Therefore, the all-star team is the best team in the entire country.

DIVISION: arguing that an individual must have the characteristics of the group.

EX: The all-star team is the best in the entire country. Therefore, Sam Smith (the pitcher) must be the best pitcher in the entire country.

DICTO SIMPLICITER: an argument, based on an unqualified generalization.

EX: Exercise is good; therefore, everybody should exercise.

CONTRADICTORY PREMISES: the main premises contradict each other.

EX: If God can do anything, can He make a stone so heave He will not be able to lift it?

OVERGENERALIZING (OR HASTY GENERALIZATION): Too few instances are presented to reach an accurate conclusion.

EXCLUSION: an important piece of evidence is left out of the inductive chain used as a base for the conclusion. (Invalid induction)

PREMISE AND THE COMMON GROUND: the terms of the premise must be accepted as true.

EX: “All college graduates are geniuses” would not be a sound premise and would lead to the wrong conclusions.

FALSE ANALOGY: wrongful comparisons of dissimilar situations.

EX: Doctors have x-rays to guide them during operations; therefore, students should be able to use their books during examinations.

AD VERICUNDIAM: an appeal to authority. (“Figures prove…” is a variation.)

EX: It says so in the Bible. My teacher says… The priest said…

AD POPULUM: appeal to a crowd.

EX: Mah fehlow Ahmericans…(LBJ)

SELF-EVIDENT TRUTHS: proceeding from an unwarranted assumption to a foregone conclusion (includes folk sayings: “Time is money”).

EX: Everybody knows

GUILT (OR INNOCENCE) BY ASSOCIATION:

EX: Max reads all those radical magazine articles that favor overthrow of the government, so he must hold the same views.

EITHER/OR FALLACY: requires absolutes which do not allow for intermediate cases.

EX: Do you want to go to college or dig ditches all your life?

Obviously, some of the preceding fallacies overlap. Also, they may be given different names by different authorities. Other examples could be included: no list is likely to be complete.

COMPLEX QUESTION

Is it true blondes have more fun?When did you stop beating your wife?

A complex question is one in which there is both an implied A and B.  To answer part B assumes that the answer to part A is "yes."  For example,

"When did you stop beating your wife?" implies that you did at one pointbeat your wife.

Begging the question, somtimes also called "petitio principii" or "circular reasoning," means that the conclusion is assumed as the proof or where 2 things are seen as the cause and effect of each other.  The following is an example:

Are you still dating ex-cons?

"It is inadvisable to let hardened criminals out a prison prematurely so that they can renew their war on society."

"Society has no right to lock up the victims of poverty and inequality for indefinite periods, brutalizing them in the name of 'rehabilitation.'"

Writers of the above theses are addressing the same issue, but each of them has settled it in advance.  The word prematurely already contains the idea that many convicts are released too soon, and other terms--hardened criminals, renew their war--reinforce the point.  For the second writer, there is no such thing as a criminal in the first place.  Prisoners have already been defined as victims, and imprisonment is equated with brutalizing.  Similarly, the quotation marks around rehabilitation dismiss the possibility that a criminal might be taught reform.  The trouble here is that both writers, in their eagerness to sweep away objections, are portraying themselves as close-minded.  No one will want to read an essay whose very thesis forbids all disagreement.

"BEGGING THE QUESTION":

1.  The student failed the test because he is dumb; he is dumb because he failed the test.

2.  Our team is the outstanding team in the conference because it has the best players and the best coach.  We know it has the best players and the best coach because it will win the conference title.  And it will win the conference title because it deserves to win the conference title.  Of course it deserves to win the conference title, for it is the outstanding team in the conference.

3.  Three thieves are dividing 7 pearls.  One hands 2 to the man on his right and 2 to the man on his left.  "I," he says, "will keep 3 pearls." The man on his right asks, "How come you keep three?"  "Because I am the leader."  "Oh, but how come you are the leader?"  "Because I have more pearls."

4. “The candidate did not win the election because not enough people voted for him.”

III. Deductive Fallacies

Fallacy #1 Affirming the Consequent The fallacy of affirming the consequent is committed when a minor premise equates a specific instance to a consequent.

All blonds are fun. Chris is fun. Chris is blond.

Great literature improves your life. Gone with the Wind improved my life. Gone with the Wind is great literature.

OR

Great literature improves your life. Buying a microwave oven improved my life. My microwave oven is great literature.

 

Fallacy #2 Denying the Antecedent The fallacy of denying the antecedent occurs when the minor premises asserts that a specific instance is not an instance of the antecedent.

All blonds are fun. Chris is not blond. Chris is not fun.

Great literature improves your life. Gone with the Wind is not great literature. Gone with the Wind cannot improve my life.

OR

Great literature is very pleasing. Chocolate cake is not great literature. Chocolate cake cannot be very pleasing.

Fallacy #3: Equivocation The fallacy of equivocation (ambiguity) occurs when a word is used in a difference sense in the minor premise than in the major premise.

The college has a special scholarship designed for poor students. My biology teacher told me that I was one of the poorest students he had ever known. I should receive a special scholarship from the college.

Fallacy #4: Division The fallacy of division occurs when the major premise deals with attributes that apply only to a group collectively and cannot be divided to apply to individual cases.

(Valid Syllogism) Birds have wings, feathers, and beaks. Spotted owls are birds. Spotted owls have wings, feathers, and beaks.

BUT

Birds are common in every area of the world. Spotted owls are birds. Spotted owls are common in every area of the world.

AND

The small-town farmer is rapidly disappearing. My father is a small-town farmer. My father is rapidly disappearing.

1) The IRS allows a deduction for every dependent in a household. Since my cat, Goldie, depends on me for everything, I suppose it would be OK to claim a deduction for her.

2) The Bible tells us that we should love those who hurt us, but since Mary has never hurt me, I must not have to love her.

3) According to census data, one out of every four Americans is a Catholic. Therefore, if parents want to raise their family Protestant, they shouldn’t have more than three children.

4) One of the main tenets of socialism is price supports on agricultural production. My opponent in this race is someone who has consistently supported price supports on dairy and tobacco products. It is time to stop electing socialists to the Senate.

5) I specifically said that those who wanted to do well on this paper should see me in my office. Since none of you came to my office, I assumed that you weren’t interested in good grades.

6) Fillmore High School had the highest average in the state on the math portion of the SAT Test. It is therefore reasonable to assume that Sarah, who went to Fillmore, will do better in her College Algebra class than Chuck, who went to Buchanan.

7) I know for a fact that married men tend to be mature and responsible. The new guy in the office strikes me as a very mature and responsible person, so I suppose that he must be married.

8) My sociology teacher told us that those of us who grew up in America in the twentieth century, with all of its greed, bigotry, and abuse of power inherited a sickness. Well, if I’m sick, I guess I don’t have to go to school today.

Definitions and Examples

1) UNQUALIFICATION GENERALIZATION (or Dicto Simpliciter). Note the following example. All Americans are friendly. Lawyers never tell the truth. Women always love babies. Beware of words like always, all, never, every: complex situations are simply not that black-and-white. Your generalizations will be more credible if you LIMIT them by using qualifiers such as sometimes, seem, in my experience, often, many, or perhaps.

2) HASTY GENERALIZATION. Related to the preceding, this is a conclusion drawn from too few samples. An example follows: That the students are smoking in the cafeteria leads me to conclude that most college students smoke.

3) NAME CALLING (or Poisoning the Well or Ad Hominem, i.e., argument attacking the man rather than the issue). Note the following example: Senator X just divorced his wife. How can his proposal be any good?

4) APPEAL TO PITY (Ad Misericordiam). For instance: We should reelect Senator X; after all, he has a crippled mother, a retarded son, and his wife just died.

5) AD POPULEM (appeal to the people, to what they want to hear or to what they fear). For example: We know we can count on you, the generous American. We don't want those people coming with their "red" ideas, do we?

6) BANDWAGON APPEAL. closely related to the above fallacy, it's the "everybody is doing it" argument. No one wants to be left out. If "everybody's doing it," then don't you want to "get on the bandwagon," right or wrong?

7) TESTIMONIAL (or association). For example: George Washington once made the same point as Senator X. It's the Christian thing to do, because, as Jesus says,...

8) HYPOTHESIS CONTRARY TO FACT. For example: The Pony Express stopped running in 1861. It must have been a failure. (The fact that the telegraph and the railroad made it obsolete and therefore unnecessary.)

9) FAULTY CAUSE AND EFFECT (confusing coincidental time sequence with genuine causation, sometimes called POST HOC). For example: Everytime I forget my umbrella, it rains, therefore I cause the rain by leaving my umbrella at home, and I can guarantee a nice day by bringing my umbrella. 10) FALSE ANALOGY (or trying to PROVE a point by analogy). For instance:

You shouldn't change in midstream; therefore you must reelect Senator X. (He isn't a horse, and the nation's business is not a river. It is no problem changing senators; in fact, if Senator S is doing a poor job, our "ride" will be easier with Senator Y "pulling" us!)

11) EITHER-OR (or the two-alternatives fallacy). Examples include: - Would you rather have a senator who is handsome and dumb or one who is ugly and intelligent? (One can be intelligent and hand some; one can be not-bad looking rather than ugly. Notice that in "Love is a Fallacy" our brilliant student/teacher commits this same fallacy. Can you find the fallacy?) - You are either FOR the law or against it! (And what if I am for PARTS of it or for it under certain circumstances but not all of them?)

12) BEGGING THE QUESTION (or circular argument). This fallacy avoids proving the truth of the conclusion by ASSUMING the truth of it in advance. For example: In a democracy the people are free because democracies are free countries.

The following are definitions with examples attached:

The assumption that what is true for the whole is also true for each of the parts: Because an orchestra plays superbly, each member of that orchestra is a superb soloist.

A detail or remark inserted into a discussion, either intentionally or unintentionally, that sidetracks the discussion

Two extremes presented as if they were the only alternatives: Either you’re going to learn to clean your room properly, or you’re going to flip burgers the rest of your life.

Too few instances are presented to reach an accurate conclusions: Short men like ice cream.

The argument directed against the speaker rather than toward what the speaker is saying.

“Why are you standing here on this street corner, wildly waving your hands and shouting?”“I’m keeping away the elephants.”“But there aren’t any elephants here.”“You bet: that’s because I’m here.” --Traditional Tale

A type of irrelevance that says, in effect, that the person who has these power is by definition right: A judge says to a witness, “If you don’t cooperate, you will be held in contempt of court.”

Defining a word so narrowly so that it has to mean what you want it to mean; also known as circular reasoning

Using words with two or more meanings, usually with the intent to deceive

An irrelevant appeal: “You cannot prove what you say; therefore your claim is wrong.”

A statement or opinion of some outside source used to strengthen an argument: “Doctors say…” and “They say that…” are examples of one form of this.

Appeals to our need to belong, to keep up with our neighbors: “If ten million housewives use Dazzle, shouldn’t you too be using Dazzle?”

A fallacy which projects the properties of the parts to the property of the whole, often leading to hasty generalizations and to stereotyping: because a small group of students at Cougar School cause trouble with the administration, some people will label all the students at Cougar School as troublemakers.

An argument that appeals to prejudices and unfounded fears in an effort to distract the audience from the issues at hand: “Come on—you’re going to be the only one without the Dazzle-Master. You don’t want to be left out!”

A false argument that tries to claim similarity and to establish identity under the guise of merely suggesting that similarity:“Now, don’t be so hard on him. He meant well.”“Yeah, well, so did Hitler!”

(We used these in class)Argument Fallacies: Each of the following represent the lapses in logic that reflect upon our ability to think clearly. Which of the most common fallacies are represented below?

A student tries to see an instructor during her conference period, finds her out, and goes away muttering, “She’s never there when she should be.” (HG)

“Bill’s been out almost every night for the last two weeks. Who is she?” (NS)

“We shouldn’t allow a right-wing sympathizer like Mary Dailey to represent us in Congress.” (BQ)

“Latins make better lovers. Blondes have more fun. Women are lousy drivers.” (Stereotyping)

Goodyear advertisement: “Buy these tires or plan on getting stuck in the snow a lot this winter.” (E/O)

Vitamin A is harmful to your health, and all bottles should carry a warning label. If enough of us write the Food and Drug Administration, we can get the labeling we need.” (BQ)

“Pauline is a good manager because she runs the company effectively.” CA)

I always catch a cold over Spring Break.(Post Hoc)

Vince Lombardi won two Super Bowls by insisting on perfect execution of plays and enforcing strict disciplinary measures. We’re going to win the conference championship by following the same methods. (FA)

The Ford Thunderbolt is a much better value than the Honda Harmony. Besides, the Japanese are becoming too prominent in our country. They’re buying up businesses and real estate on both the East and West Coast. Many Americans don’t want to work for a Japanese boss. (Off Point)

Sam Bernhart doesn’t deserve promotion to Personnel Manager. His divorce was a disgrace, and he’s always writing letters to the editor. The company should find someone more suitable. (Ad H)

The streets of our country are in turmoil. The universities are filled with students rebelling and rioting. Communists are seeking to destroy our country. Russia is threatening us with her might, and the public is in danger. Yes, danger from within and without. We need law and order. Yes, without law and order our nation cannot survive. Elect us, and we shall by law and order be respected among the nations of the world. Without law and order, our republic shall fall. (Appeal to Crowd)

The next slated speaker, Dr. Sylvester Crampton, was for years a member of the Economic Information Committee. This foundation has very strong ties with other ultra right-wing groups, some of which have been labeled fascistic. When he speaks next Thursday, whose brand of Americanism will he be selling? (G by A)

If a black cat crosses your path, you’ll have bad luck. (Post Hoc)

Choices: Faulty Analogy, Post Hoc, Guilt by Association, Appeal to the Crowd, ad hominem, Arguing off point, Circular Argument, Begging the Question, Either/Or Fallacy, Stereotyping, Non Sequitur, Hasty Generalization

Strategies for Successful Writing. Reinking, Hart, and Von Der Osten, Boston: Prentice Hall 1993.

Questions that can help identify fallacies

First, ask yourself “in what way is the example trying to distract from the real issue?”

Then use these questions to sort out what is in the example and narrow the possibilities so that you avoid wild guessing:--Does the example show a relationship between parts and whole? (If so, is it

composition or division?)

--Does the example show a relationship between cause and effect? (If so, is it false cause, hasty generalization, or petitio principii?)

--Is there enough evidence to support the conclusion? (Is it hasty generalization?)

--Does the example use the conclusion to prove the cause? (Is it petitio principii?)

--Does the example require that a choice must be made? Is a threat implied or simply choosing between only 2 possibilities? (Is it Argumentum ad Baculum or Black or White?)

--Is there a double meaning in the example? (Is it equivocation or amphiboly?)--Does the example use emotion? (Is it Argumentum ad Misericordiam or Ignoratio

Elenchi?)

--Is there a double question implied, and the first question must be answered yes? (Is it complex question?)

--Does the example deceive by bringing a false issue to the forefront? (Is it Ignoratio Elenchi, Argumentum ad Hominem, or Special Pleading?)