Issuu on Google+

A. Fallacies of Language FALLACY 1. EQUIVOCATION

DESCRIPTIONS Is an argument where words are used in different meanings. The fallacy can be based on a confusion between the formal meaning and the material meaning of the term.

2. AMPHIBOLY

Is the ambiguous use of a phrase or sentence.

3. COMPOSITION

Is an argument that takes jointly what should be taken separately.

4. DIVISION

Is an argument that takes separately what is intended to be taken jointly

5. ACCENT

Is the fallacy committed when you change the stress in the statement.

I. Fallacy of Irrelevant Evidence FALLACY

DESCRIPTIONS

1. ARGUMENTUM AD MISERICORDIAM (Appeal to Pity)

This is an error committed by appealing to sympathy

2.ARGUMENTUM AD PAPULUM (Appeal to people)

This is committed when one evades the point under discussion and instead appeals to the opinion, passions, or prejudice of people.

3. ARGUMENTUM AD HOMINEM ( Argument Against the Person)

This happens when the person of the arguer is attacked, rather than his argument.

4. ARGUMENTUM AD BACULUM (Appeal to the Stick)

This is committed when one seeks to establish a conclusion by restoring to force, intimidation or threat.

5. ARGUMENTUM AD VERECUNDIAM ( Appeal to wrong Authority)

This happens when a wrong or unqualified is cited to establish a conclusion.


6. ARGUMENTUM AD IGNORATIAM (Appeal to Ignorance)

7. NON-SEQUITUR (It Does not Follow)

This occurs when one proves that a thing is true because it cannot be proven otherwise; or a thing is false because it cannot be proven true.

This refers to an argument whose conclusion does not follow logically from the premises as when two ideas are disconnected.

II. Fallacies of Insufficient Evidence FALLACIES

DESCRIPTIONS

1. Hasty Generalization

This occurs when one generalizes about an entire set on the basis of a small sample that does not represent the Set.

2. False Cause

Committing an error by assuming that the most recent event is the cause of the present event.

3.Neglected Aspect

This is committed when one presents evidence in support of one conclusion while neglecting or ignoring evidences that would support another.

4. Fallacy of Accident

This is committed when one takes a general rule and applies it to its accidental or exceptional cases.

III. Miscellaneous Fallacies FALLACIES 1. Begging the Question a)Assumed But Not Proven

DESCRIPTIONS This occurs when one assumes as already true what has yet to be proven.

b) Circular Reasoning

One argues by using the premise to prove the conclusion and then uses the same conclusion to prove the premise.

2. Complex Question

This is asking a question that presupposes an answer to another question that has not been asked or answered.


3. Rationalizing

Inventing seemingly valid reasons for acts, events, and opinions in place of real ones.

4. Self-Contradiction

Presenting an argument containing contradictory or inconsistent premises.

5. False Analogy

Analogy works on the premise that when two things are similar in certain respects, then they are also similar in other respects. But an analogy may be carried too far.

6. Black or White

This fallacy arises when we limit alternatives to “either… or …”, failing to take into account the mediating circumstance between the extremes.

7. Slippery Slope

The arguer claims that a sort of chain reaction, usually ending in some dire consequence, will take place, but there’s really not enough evidence for that assumption.

8. Straw man

The arguer sets up a wimpy version of the opponent’s position and tries to score points by knocking it down.

•Truth Table A T T F F

B T F T F

A&B T F F F

A/B T T T F

A →B T F T T

A↔ B T F F T


Logic