Transcript Fallacy 2 - resources

Fallacy Project
Appeal to
• A non-rational persuasion designed to invoke fear by threatening
the safety or happiness of ourselves or someone we love; often
called scare tactics or appeal to force.
• “[If] God should let you go, you would immediately sink, and
sinfully descend, and plunge into the bottomless gulf…The God
that holds you over the pit of hell, much as one holds a spider, or
some loathsome insect over the fire, abhors you, and is dreadfully
provoked: his wrath towards you burns like fire; he looks upon
you as worthy of nothing else, but to be cast into the fire.”
- Jonathan Edwards “Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God”
– In this excerpt, Edwards is attempting to frighten his audience
into submission to an “angry” God. By threatening both their
safety and well-being, he is able to use this scare tactic to
achieve his purpose.
Burden of Proof
• In general, it is up to the person making an argument to try to
prove it. It's your job to prove me wrong when I make the
assertion in question.
 “Why can't the religious believer simply put the burden on the
skeptic, and ask him to justify his unbelief, with the underlying
assumption that as between theism and atheism, it is the former
that is obviously true and the latter that is obviously false?”
-Professor Ralph McInerny, “Why the Burden of Proof is on the
Atheist”
- Here Ralph McInerny tackles the ever-present battle between
faith-based beliefs and non-faith-based beliefs. However, he
says that the atheists, not the faith-following people, needed to
prove themselves, thus shifting the burden of proof.
Wishful Thinking
• Wishful thinking is, in some ways, a fallacy opposite to an appeal to
indirect consequences. In wishful thinking, an extremely positive
outcome, but one just as remote, is suggested in the hope that it will
distract from the merits of the case at hand.
 “For a bowl of water give a goodly meal. For a kingly greeting bow
thou down with zeal. For a simple penny pay thou back with gold. If
they life be rescued, life do not withhold. Thus the words and actions
of the wise regard. Every little service tenfold they reward. But the
truly noble know all men as one, and return with gladness good for evil
done.”
-Gandhi
– Here, Gandhi is attempting to mask the aspects of hunger, poverty,
or any other lacking, by saying that any decent and good action will
receive goodness in return. This logic, while comforting, is wishful
thinking.
• Two wrongs make a right is similar to appeal to common practice. This
faulty logic is based on the idea that it is acceptable to do something, not
because other people are doing it, but because they are doing other things
just as bad. It implies that the action or thought is wrong, but one can see
why it would be falsely assumed acceptable due to the circumstances. Both
actions are not supported by any idea other than retribution. In "two
wrongs,” it's not just that other people are doing something wrong, but that
they are doing it to you; and that seems to excuse what one would likely
recognize as unacceptable.
 “Calm, gentle, passionless, as he appeared, there was yet, we fear, a quiet
depth of malice, hitherto latent, but active now, in this unfortunate old
man, which led him to imagine a more intimate revenge than any mortal
had ever wreaked upon an enemy. All that dark treasure to be lavished on
the very man, to whom nothing else could so adequately pay the debt of
vengeance.” -Nathaniel Hawthorne, The Scarlet Letter
– Hawthorne proceeds to explain about the man’s belief that he had been
wrongfully treated, and therefore the evil that he wrongfully subjected
people to was actually brought on by themselves.
?
Loaded Question
?
• A loaded question has a false presupposition and is loaded with a false
statement. A loaded question is one in which cannot be directly answered
without implying a falsehood. Especially found in “yes”/“no” questions.
 He sprang on her and sputtered, “Why didn’t you hit him back? Where’s
your spirit? Do you think I’d a let him beat me?”
“Do you call me a liar or a blindman!” he shouted.
“Jedge not,” he shouted, “lest ye be not jedged!” The tinge of his face was a
shade more purple than hers. “You!” he said. “You let him beat you any
time he wants to and don’t do a thing but blubber a little and jump up and
down!”
“He nor nobody else has ever touched me,” she said, measuring off each
word in a deadly flat tone. “Nobody’s ever put a hand on me and if anybody
did, I’d kill him.”
“And black is white,” the old man piped, “and night is day!”
-Flannery O’Connor “A View of the Woods”
- O’Connor presents a complicated situation in which the physical health
of an individual is being questioned. In this situation, answering the
question “Do you think I’d let him beat me” is loaded despite the
answer; a “yes” answer would indicate doubt in the person’s pride, and
a “no” answer would indicate a doubt in the person’s physical abilities.
?
?
Appeal to Authority
• Appeal to Authority might not originally be seen as a fallacy. Often
arguments are based on the ideas or theories or simple statements of
people in authoritative positions, those we consider experts. Thus, we
do not look behind the statements; rather we accept them as fact. This
fallacy is also known as an appeal to questionable authority.
 “…for we are told by a grave author, an eminent French physician, that
fish being a prolific diet, there are more children born in Roman
Catholic countries about nine months after Lent than at any other
season; therefore, reckoning a year after Lent the markets will be more
glutted than usual, because the number of popish infants is at least
three to one in this kingdom…by lessening the number of popists
among us.”
-Jonathan Swift, “A Modest Proposal”
- Swift refers to “a grave author” and “an eminent French physician”
(being the same person) and continues to build his argument with
the man’s statements. He does not supply any support other than
this man’s statements, and therefore makes an Appeal to Authority
because the argument is not founded.
• A prejudice is a predisposition to judge groups of people or things either
positively or negatively, even after the facts of a case indicate otherwise.
By appealing to a prejudice in the listener, the person making the
argument attempts to ensure a favorable reaction. Most often, such an
appeal works on negative images, and extreme cases can be classified as
so-called "hate speech.”
 “This international power structure is used to suppress masses of darkskinned people all over the world and exploit them of their natural
resources.”
- Malcolm X, February14, 1965 (taken from essay
“Malcolm X, our revolutionary son and brother” by Patricia Robinson)
– Malcolm X is here trying to inspire affirmative and abrupt actions in
response to his statements. Therefore, he adopts the appeal to
prejudice logic, tapping into the emotions of the listener, presumably
a black radical person, and instead of creating truth, displaying faulty
logic.
Appeal to
• Appeals to Spite, to hatred, and to indignation attempt to tap into the animus a
person feels about an individual or group of people or things. They differ
from appeal to prejudice in the sense that prejudice works on a pre-existing
belief, which may be positive or negative, but spite can be elicited by the
attempt at persuasion itself, and is always negative.
 “This woman has brought shame upon us all, and ought to die. Is there not
law for it? Truly, there is, both in the Scripture and the statutebook. Then let
the magistrates, who have made it of no effect, thank themselves if their own
wives and daughters go astray!”
-The Scarlet Letter, Nathaniel Hawthorne
- Nathaniel Hawthorne is using Appeal to Spite here to show the emotions
of the townspeople in The Scarlet Letter. This statement allows
Hawthorne to explore the full extent to which the people’s hatred might
grow against Hester and how it could grow even more when one man or
woman was outspoken about her adultery, tapping into each person’s
emotions.
• A fallacy that occurs when a person misrepresents another's view so
as to easily discredit it. This can happen intentionally or
unintentionally. The image that this fallacy conjures up is that of a
person building a straw man just to knock it over. The author
attacks an argument which is different from, and usually weaker
than, the opposition's best argument.
 “We all want our families, our soldiers, our unions, our sports teams
to be united toward clear, common goals. But is it not dangerous for
a democratic populace weighing if and how to wage war to value
unity above all else? It is all too easy to mandate patriotism, as the
New York Board of Education did last week, bringing back the
Pledge of Allegiance, as if that will stop the Osama Bin Ladens of
the world.”
- Robert Schere, “A True Patriot Can Pose Hard
Questions,” Los Angeles Times, October 23, 2000
- Schere uses Straw Man to explain his point that unity will not stop
terrorism, despite all the national pride it may create. He begins his
passage by agreeing that all Americans would like unity and then
proceeds to explain why unity is dangerous and why we, in fact, do
not want unity.
Indirect Consequences
• This type of fallacy centers around the claim that if we justify an
action, then this will also justify some other actions, and these will
not be desirable. The idea here is that the reasoning which justifies
one action will also justify other actions, ones which will be
detrimental or undesirable.
 “The use of COBOL cripples the mind; its teaching should,
therefore, be regarded as a criminal offense.”
-Edsgar Dijkstra,
mathematician
- In this short comment, Dijkstra provides us with his opinion that
the use of COBOL should be a criminal offense. However, he
bases this on the justification of another argument, where it is
justified to not use COBOL due to its harmful effects on the mind.
This is a clear use of Indirect Consequences.
Part for the
Whole
• A part-whole relationship indicates that one or more object is
part of another object.The problem is that non-equivalent terms
have been substituted. Substituting the parts for the whole is
sometimes called the fallacy of division.
 “This single farm of ours would support a dozen horses, twenty
cows, hundreds of sheep – and all of them living in a comfort
and a dignity that are now almost beyond our imagining.”
-Animal Farm, George Orwell
– In this excerpt Orwell attempts to show that the one singular
farm will encompass all of the characters’ happiness and
wishes--thus substituting part for the whole.
Whole for the
parts
• Substituting the whole for its parts is sometimes called the fallacy of
composition. It is trying to say that the part is as important as the
whole, which is fallacious.
 “He claimed to know of the existence of a mysterious country called
Sugarcandy Mountain, to which all animals went when they died. It
was situated somewhere up in the sky, a little distance beyond the
clouds, Moses said. In Sugarcandy Mountain it was Sunday seven days
a week, clover was in season all the year round, and lump sugar and
linseed cake grew on the hedges.” -Animal Farm, George Orwell
• This quote states that each of the individual parts of Sugarcandy
Mountain is just as important as the entire mountain, mainly the idea of
happiness after death.
False Compromise
• The fallacy of false compromise usually occurs when we do not know
or care much about the terms of the debate.Without looking at the
arguments being made, we can never rule out the possibility that one
side is completely right, and the other side is completely wrong.
• Some of the animals talked of the duty of loyalty to Mr. Jones, whom
they referred to as “Master,” or made elementary remarks such as “Mr.
Jones feeds us. If he were gone, we should starve to death”…the pigs
had great difficulty in making them see that this was contrary to the
spirit of Animalism. The stupidest questions of all were asked by
Mollie, the white mare. The very first question she asked Snowball
was: “Will there still be sugar after the Rebellion?”… “And shall I still
be allowed to wear ribbons in my mane?” asked Mollie. “Comrade,”
said Snowball, “…Can you not understand that liberty is worth more
than ribbons?” Mollie agreed, but she did not sound very convinced.
-Animal Farm, George Orwell
• In this example, Mollie is portrayed as being quite indifferent to the
rebellion, which is the main point of discussion and more worried
about her everyday luxuries.
False Equity
• The fallacy of false equity can be committed either by someone
making an argument, or someone analyzing one. While it is often a
good strategy to cover both sides of an argument, such a strategy is
never a necessary requirement of a good argument; and we also should
not be swayed by someone simply because he or she does cover both
sides.
 “There is little shame in the Democratic Party these days when it
comes to fund-raising. Last year Democratic candidates for the Senate
received more in soft money contributions than Republicans. Soft
money is the worst, but by no means the only, kind of special-interest
money allowed by the law. The interests that donate these hundreds of
millions of dollars have the greatest influence over both parties.”
-Jim Shannon, “Democrats Fall Short on Shame,” Boston Globe
 - This excerpt cover both sides of the issue, but still conveys its
original purpose which is to condemn the Democrats who received soft
money.
Common Practice
• The basic idea that people do something to support an action or
practice. It is a fallacy because the mere fact that most people
do something does not make it correct, moral, justified, or
reasonable.
 "In my time," said the grandmother, folding her thin veined
fingers, "children were more respectful of their native states
and their parents and everything else. People did right then.” –
Flannery O’Connor “A Good Man is Hard to Find”
- In this excerpt, O’Connor shows the grandmother’s naivety and
lack of knowledge about the modern society by basing one of
her statements on common practice. The grandmother’s idea
that all children in her day respected their native states and their
parents is not founded, rather it is based on the fact that most
children did so. This does not support the argument adequately,
making it faulty.
Appeal to Common Belief
• While surveys of common beliefs and popular opinions are a legitimate way to
support some evaluative statements, they can never be used to argue the accuracy of
most statements of verification. Using popular opinions to support a claim that must
be verified in another manner is a fallacious appeal to common belief. Such fallacies
are also called appeals to opinion, to belief, and to popular belief.
 “Had she been in any degree intellectual, he could have proved to here form early
Christian history that no excess of virtue is justified, that a moderation of good
produces likewise a moderation in evil, that if Anthony of Egypt had stayed at home
and attended to his sister, no devils would have plagued him.”
-Flannery O’Connor,“The Comforts of Home”
- O’Connor uses the thoughts of a man pondering great thoughts of ancient times to
exhibit Appeal to Common Belief. Through his statements about virtue, evil, and
Anthony of Egypt, we see that they are fallaciously based on common belief or
popular opinion, and are not validated, thus making them fallacious Appeals to
Common Belief.
Faulty Dilemma
• This fallacy is committed when a person argues that there are
only so many options, and you must choose between them,
when in fact there are more options available. This fallacy is
also called the “either/or fallacy.” because it looks like you have
to choose either this, or that. A false dilemma is an illegitimate
use of the "or" conjunction and is often seen as treating a
complex issue as if it has only two sides.
 And his disciples asked him, “Rabbi, who sinned, this man or
his parents, that he was born blind?” Jesus answered, “It was
not that this man sinned, or his parents, but that the works of
God might be made manifest in him.” - John 9:2-3
- In this excerpt from the Bible, a disciple presents Jesus with a
question that has only two answers, the man or his parents.
However, Jesus sees the faulty dilemma and contradicts it by
presenting his statement and explaining why this faulty dilemma
is fallacious.
• Establishing an unjustified link between cause and effect.
The fallacious reasoning goes like this: one event
happened soon after another event. Therefore, the first
event caused the second one to occur.
 "The only policy that effectively reduces public shootings
is right-to-carry laws. Allowing citizens to carry concealed
handguns reduces violent crime. In the 31 states that have
passed right-to-carry laws since the mid-1980s, the number
of multiple-victim public shootings and other violent
crimes has dropped dramatically. Murders fell by 7.65%,
rapes by 5.2%, aggravated assaults by 7%, and robberies
by 3%."
- ("The Media Campaign Against Gun
Ownership", The Phyllis Schlafly Report, Vol. 33, No. 11,
June 2000.)
- In this anti-gun ownership campaign, this article is
presented, clearly representing post hoc. While certain
crime numbers may have dropped and in those states rightto-carry laws had been implemented, there are no direct
correlation between the two fact. However, this is the
fallacious reasoning of the passage.
Hasty Generalization
• In a hasty generalization, the size of the sample is too small to support the
conclusion, thus the statement is not supported enough.
 “Of course your columnist Michele Slatalla was joking when she wrote about
needing to talk with her fifty-eight year old mother about going to a nursing
home. While I admire Slatalla’s concern for her parents and agree that as one
approaches 60 it is wise to make some long-term plans, I hardly think that 58 is
the right age at which to talk about a retirement home unless there are some
serious health concerns. In this era when people are living to health and ripe old
age, Slatalla is jumping the gun. My 85-year old mother power walks two miles
each day, drives her car (safely), climbs stairs, does crosswords, reads the daily
paper, and can probably beat Slatalla at almost anything.”
- Nancy Edwards, “Letters to the Editor”, Time, June 26, 2000
- The author of this passage makes all her assumptions about the elderly on her
mother, who is apparently a remarkable woman. By basing her opinions on her
mother, Edwards proceeds to make a hasty generalization about the elderly
population.
Ad hominem
• Another fallacy is called ad hominem meaning argument to the
man. This fallacy is committed when instead of dealing with
what a person is arguing, one argues that the person is lacking
in character. The reason that this is fallacious is that a persons
character has no bearing on the truth or falsehood of truth
claims.
•
 “For John came neither eating nor drinking and they say he has
a demon; the son of man came eating and drinking and they say
behold, a glutton and a drunkard, a friend of tax collectors and
sinners! Yet wisdom is justified by her deeds.” -Matthew 11:18-19
- Throughout the gospel, Jesus is attacked by the Pharisees and
the Sadducees who were looking to discredit Jesus. In this
passage, he rebukes their ad hominem arguments, pointing to
the stubborn nature of that generation, (they would not be
pleased with either John or Jesus), but he making the point that
while they may attend to demean his character they will be
proved wrong and Jesus will be proved right by his actions.
• Making a generalization that cannot be supported no matter how much evidence
is supplied, usually done using absolute statements or stereotypes. Applying a
generalization that is usually true to an exceptional case by ignoring the
peculiarities of the case.
 “Mercy on us, goodwife,” exclaimed a man in the crowd, “is there no virtue in
woman, save what springs from a wholesome fear of the gallows?”
-The Scarlet Letter, Nathaniel Hawthorne
- Hawthorne uses sweeping generalization in this example to show the thoughts
of the crowd, particularly one man. His words create a sweeping generalization
about women, by saying that women have no virtue unless they fear death. This
is the type of generalized statement that cannot be proven true.
Appeal to Vanity
•
Also known as apple-polishing, the strategy behind this fallacy is
to create a predisposition toward agreement by paying
compliments. The success of the strategy depends on a combination
of the vanity of the target and the subtlety of the compliment, and it
is usually more effect when the compliment is somehow related to
the issue at hand.
 “Listen," the grandmother almost screamed, "I know you're a good
man. You don't look a bit like you have common blood. I know you
must come from nice people!“
"Yes mam," he said, "finest people in the world." When he smiled
he showed a row of strong white teeth. "God never made a finer
woman than my mother and my daddy's heart was pure gold," he
said. -Flannery O’Connor “A Good Man is Hard to Find”
- The grandmother in this situation is practicing Appeal to Vanity.
She fears for her safety and health, and thus begins to compliment
the man who is threatening her, hoping that she can win him over
rather than facing death.
Appeal to Pity
• A fallacious appeal to pity, also known as a sob story, is different from a
simple (and perfectly legitimate) appeal to pity because it is used to
replace logic, rather than to support it. When the fallacy does occur, it is
usually exhibits either a greatly exaggerated problem or an inappropriate
request. Mainly, a fallacious appeal to pity uses emotion in place of
reason to persuade.
 "You wouldn't shoot a lady, would you?" the grandmother said and
removed a clean handkerchief from her cuff and began to slap at her
eyes with it.
- Flannery O’Connor “A Good Man is Hard to Find”
─ Once again, O’Connor uses the character of the grandmother to use
fallacious logic. Here, the grandmother attempts to use the emotions of
herself as a woman and the emotions that the man might feel about a
woman and exaggerates them, desperately trying to get out of her
situation.
Appeal to Loyalty
• Appeal to Loyalty is based on the idea that one should act with
the group's best interests, regardless of the merits of the particular
case being argued. A version of appeal to loyalty is the fallacious
use of peer pressure. In this case, one's agreement is sought, not
on the basis of what is good for the group as in appeal to loyalty,
but on the basis of what others in that group would or do think.
 "Listen," he said. I never asked much of you. I taken you and
raised you and saved you from ass in town and now all I'm asking
in return is when I die to get me in the ground where the death
belong and set up a cross over me to show I'm there. That's all in
the world I'm asking you to do."
- Flannery O'Connor (You Can't Be Any Poorer Than Dead)
- In this passage, O’Connor character uses Appeal to Loyalty in an
attempt to persuade someone to do them a favor. The man pleads
with the other character, basing his opinion on what he believes is
best for him (and therefore, best for the group). Thus his
argument is an Appeal to Loyalty rather than a logical argument.
• Circular reasoning is arguing an argument with the conclusion that is to
be drawn from the argument, or the conclusion of an argument if,
explicitly or implicitly, used as a reason for itself.
 When I asserted that the YAHOOS were the only governing animals in my
country , us, and what was their employment?” I told him, “we had great
numbers; that in summer they grazed in the fields, and in winter were
kept in houses with hay and oats, where YAHOO servants were employed
to rub their skins smooth, comb their manes, pick their feet, serve them
with food, and make their beds. “I understand you well, “said my master:
“it is now very plain,from all you have spoken, that whatever share of
reason the YAHOOS pretend to, the HOUYHNMS are your masters; I
heartily wish our YAHOOS would be so tractable.”
-Jonathan
Swift, Gulliver’s Travels
- In this excerpt from Swift’s work, we find this passage of circular
reasoning. The man whom the narrator is speaking to actually proves the
narrator’s point through circular reasoning, for he uses the conclusion of
the speaker’s argument to found his own points, only further proving the
validity of the narrator’s statements.