rhetoric, rationalization, and bad argument strategies informal fallacies and non-arguments
Post on 20-Dec-2015
220 views
TRANSCRIPT
Rhetoric, Rationalization, and Bad Argument Strategies
Informal Fallacies and Non-arguments
Argument from OutrageWhen anger functions as a premise
May use selective presentation to attempt to create, increase, or confirm feelings of anger
Argument from OutrageWhen anger functions as a premise
May use selective presentation to attempt to create, increase, or confirm feelings of anger
May attempt to justify letting anger over one thing influence judgment about another, unrelated thing
Argument from OutrageWhen anger functions as a premise
May use selective presentation to attempt to create, increase, or confirm feelings of anger
May attempt to justify letting anger over one thing influence judgment about another, unrelated thing
May simplistically attempt to focus anger on an easy target (scapegoating)
Dennis Miller on war with Iraq: “After 9/11, we had to do something!”
Scare Tactics/Argument by ForceWhen fear functions as a premise
May use selective presentation to attempt to create, increase, or confirm feelings of fear
Scare Tactics/Argument by ForceWhen fear functions as a premise
May use selective presentation to attempt to create, increase, or confirm feelings of fear
May attempt to justify letting fear of one thing influence judgment about another, unrelated thing
Scare Tactics/Argument by ForceWhen fear functions as a premise
May use selective presentation to attempt to create, increase, or confirm feelings of fear
May attempt to justify letting fear of one thing influence judgment about another, unrelated thing
Depends on inappropriate beliefs about what is feared
To consider: Stockholm (Hostage) Syndrome -- acceptance of captors’ beliefs by hostages
Argument from PityWhen sympathy functions as a premise
Occurs often as self-deception
Argument from PityWhen sympathy functions as a premise
Occurs often as self-deception May make calculated demands on
feelings of sympathy and compassion
Argument from PityWhen sympathy functions as a premise
Occurs often as self-deception May make calculated demands on
feelings of sympathy and compassion May result in assumption of inadequately
justified obligations
Argument from PityWhen sympathy functions as a premise
Occurs often as self-deception May make calculated demands on
feelings of sympathy and compassion May result in assumption of inadequately
justified obligations Can be mitigated by competent moral
reasoning
Argument from EnvyWhen jealousy motivates premises
Selection of premises may be influenced by irrelevant feelings
Unstated (assumed) premises are likely Likely to occur as interior rationalization
Apple PolishingWhen flattery motivates premises
Wishful ThinkingWhen hope or desire motivates premises
Fallacy includes as a premise the belief that thinking or wishing will change probability
Wishful ThinkingWhen hope or desire motivates premises
Fallacy includes as a premise the belief that thinking or wishing will change probability
Key “wishful thinking” premise may be an explicit metaphysical belief
Wishful ThinkingWhen hope or desire motivates premises
Fallacy includes as a premise the belief that thinking or wishing will change probability
Key “wishful thinking” premise may be an explicit metaphysical belief
May occur as interior rationalization, explanation of faith, or “cheerleading”
Peer Pressure/Group ThinkWhen need for approval or belonging
motivates premises
Claims accepted (function as true) because the group wants them accepted
Peer Pressure/Group ThinkWhen need for approval or belonging
motivates premises
Claims accepted (function as true) because the group wants them accepted
Known fact: people may change beliefs or interpretations if they find themselves in the minority, even in a group of strangers
Peer Pressure/Group ThinkWhen need for approval or belonging
motivates premises
Claims accepted (function as true) because the group wants them accepted
Known fact: people may change beliefs or interpretations if they find themselves in the minority, even in a group of strangers
As nationalism, may be actively used to discourage critical thinking
RationalizingWhen inauthentic premises are substituted
for true motives to justify a conclusion
Misdirects attention from potentially relevant facts or ideas
RationalizingWhen inauthentic premises are substituted
for true motives to justify a conclusion
Misdirects attention from potentially relevant facts or ideas
May constitute or result from self-deception
RationalizingWhen inauthentic premises are substituted
for true motives to justify a conclusion
Misdirects attention from potentially relevant facts or ideas
May constitute or result from self-deception
Substituted premises may also support unintended conclusions
Argument from Popularity/ Tradition/Common Practice
When a widely-held belief that something is true or right is deemed sufficient support Evidence supporting the belief or behavior
is not accessible for evaluation
Argument from Popularity/ Tradition/Common Practice
When a widely-held belief that something is true or right is deemed sufficient support Evidence supporting the belief or behavior
is not accessible for evaluation Tends to gather strength with repetition
Argument from Popularity/ Tradition/Common Practice
When a widely-held belief that something is true or right is deemed sufficient support Evidence supporting the belief or behavior
is not accessible for evaluation Tends to gather strength with repetition When group decisions have performative
power--as in most votes--what the group thinks actually can make a proposition true or make behavior right or wrong
Relativism/SubjectivismWhen truth is reduced to perspective
Matters of fact and matters of opinion must be treated differently
Relativism/SubjectivismWhen truth is reduced to perspective
Matters of fact and matters of opinion must be treated differently
Legitimate differences in perception must be acknowledged
Relativism/SubjectivismWhen truth is reduced to perspective
Matters of fact and matters of opinion must be treated differently
Legitimate differences in perception must be acknowledged
Cultural variables and prerogatives must be identified
Relativism/SubjectivismWhen truth is reduced to perspective
Matters of fact and matters of opinion must be treated differently
Legitimate differences in perception must be acknowledged
Cultural variables and prerogatives must be identified
Moral and ethical values are obvious cases in which preferences are decisive
Two Wrongs FallacyWhen wrong is taken for right
Begins with A harming B, or even being suspected of thinking harming B is OK
Two Wrongs FallacyWhen wrong is taken for right
Begins with A harming B, or even being suspected of thinking harming B is OK
B decides to engage in wrongful behavior just because A did or might
Two Wrongs FallacyWhen wrong is taken for right
Begins with A harming B, or even being suspected of thinking harming B is OK
B decides to engage in wrongful behavior just because A did or might
B’s decision is simply reactive, and not the outcome of reasoned inference
Red Herring/SmokescreenWhen irrelevancies obscure relevant ones
Both tend to introduce material that the audience will find attractive
Red Herring/SmokescreenWhen irrelevancies obscure relevant ones
Both tend to introduce material that the audience will find attractive
The red herring introduces distractions, especially ones that share significant features with the issue
Red Herring/SmokescreenWhen irrelevancies obscure relevant ones
Both tend to introduce material that the audience will find attractive
The red herring introduces distractions, especially ones that share significant features with the issue
The smokescreen introduces new topics and complications that obscure the issue