recognizing problems in reasoning. an error in reasoning. fallacies may be applied intentionally...

Recognizing problems in reasoning

An error in reasoning. Fallacies may be applied intentionally or

may show faulty logic or a weakness in an argument.

Recognizing fallacious arguments allows you to avoid falling into rhetorical traps and being convinced too easily.

Understanding how others construct arguments helps us to make informed choices about products, political candidates, leaders, even friends.

Understanding fallacies helps you to strategically employ them in your own rhetoric to argue more persuasively.

Formal—an argument that is deductively invalid. Deductive reasoning –general to specific;

theory-hypothesis-observation-confirmation Informal—an argument that does not

prove inductively probable. Inductive reasoning—specific to general;

observation-pattern recognition-hypothosis-theory

1 : a deductive scheme of a formal argument consisting of a major and a minor premise and a conclusion (as in “every virtue is laudable; kindness is a virtue; therefore kindness is laudable”) 2 : a subtle, specious, or crafty argument 3 : deductive reasoning (Merriam-Webster’s Online Dictionary)

Valid: (1) All men are mortal. (2) Socrates is a man.

Therefore: (3) Socrates is mortal.

An attack on a person or that person’s character (ethos) rather than on the argument itself

Assumes that popularity or growing popularity of an idea proves the value of that idea

the truth of the conclusion is assumed by the premises

The name of this fallacy comes from the fact that the fallacious argument either; A) Does not truly answer the question posed or B) raises further questions which the arguer fails to answer

Also known as “circular reasoning”

Derives name from fox hunting, specifically from the practice of using smoked herrings, which are red, to distract hounds from the scent of their quarry

Use of an irrelevant or unrelated argument to distract an audience or speaker

From the Latin “post hoc, ergo propter hoc”, or “after this, therefore because of this”.

Assumes that because B occurs after A, A caused B.

Attacking something that was never said nor directly implied; exaggerating the claims of an opponent to make the claims appear weaker.

Definitions and examples adapted from: http://www.webenglishteacher.com/

fallacies.html http://www.fallacyfiles.org/bandwagn.html http://www.winthrop.edu/wcenter/

handoutsandlinks/fallacies.pdf http://www.carm.org/apologetics/fallacies.htm http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/ http://www.don-lindsay-archive.org/skeptic/

arguments.html