Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 3

THE WORLD OF FALLACY Fallacy - First discuss by aristotle in De sophisticis elenchis, (sophistical refutation) - Fallacy is used to indicate any

false belief or cause of a false belief - An error in reasoning - An incorrect argument - A type of argument that seems to be correct,but the proves,on examination,not to be so. Fallacy as a term either refer to: A. A kind of error in an argument B. A kind of error in reasoning (including arguments,definitions,explanations and the like C. A false belief D. The cause of any of the previous error including what are normally reffered to as rhetorical techniques Divisions/Groups of Fallacies A. FALLACIES OF RELEVANCE (NON-SEQUENTIAL) - When argument relies on premises that are NOT relevant to its conclusion - Described as IRRELEVANT to the conclusion (Ignoratio Elenchi) A.1 Argument from Ignorance (Argumentum Ad Ignorantiam) - Mistake committed when it argued that a proposition is true/false on the ground that is has NOT been proven false nor true. e.g Nobody has ever proved to me there is God, so there is no God. A.2 Appeal to Inappropriate Authority (Argument Ad Verecundiam) - Arises when the appeal is made to parties having no legitimate claim to authority in the matter at hand. e.g. You can believe the moon is covered with dust because the president of the home owner association said so, and he should know. A.3 Appeal against the Person (Argument Ad Hominem) - When the attack is leveled NOT at the claims being made or the merits of the argument, BUT at the person of the opponent. Abusive Ad Hominem - When the attack is directly against persons, seeing to defame or discredit them. e.g. What she says about Johannes Keplers astronomy of 1600s must be just so much garbage. Do you realize shes only fourteen years old? Circumstantial Ad Hominem - When the attack is indirectly against persons, seeking to defame or discredit them, hold their view chiefly because of their circumstances or interest. e.g. Why is the private development of resources so more efficient than any government? An executive asked. A.4 Appeal to Emotion (Argumentum Ad Populum) - When careful reasoning is replaced with devices calculated to elicit enthusiasm and emotional support for conclusion advanced. - Seen frequently in many TV commercials e.g. Drink enervon everyday.. A.5 Appeal to pity (Argumentum ad Misericordiam) - When careful reasoning is replaced with devices calculated to elicit symphathy on the part of the hearer for the object of the speaker concern. - Use of pity,simphathy or simply appealing to emotion to accept their claim e.g. As history instructor you accept Maxs claim that the earned an A on history quiz because he broke his wrist while playing for the colleges last basketball game. A.6 Appeal to Force (Argumentum Ad Baculum) - When careful reasoning is replaced with direct or insinuated threats to bring about the acceptamce of some conclusion.

- Use of force,intimidation,coercion,harassment in order to press an issue. e.g. Promote to a higher position otherwise I will reveal to other your deep secret. A.6.1 Appeal to Advantage (Argumentum Pansarilum) - An appeal to gain or profit.It is committed by a person to adhere to adopt a belief,policy or course of action against the persons will; forces the person to do it bcoz the advantage preferred is given e.g. I will give you job provided you would join our prayer meetings and accept our belief. A.6.2 Appeal to Money (Argumentum Ad Crumemam) (Argumentum Ad Pabagsakum) - An appeal to the sense of greed or cupidity of a person.Instead of presenting a logically valid argument, it is uses money as a bribeto the opponent to concede. e.g. Sir,please give me a passing mark. I am willing to share my fortune. How much? e.g. The money is deposited already in your account.Remember, you see nothing..you heard nothing.. A.7 Irrelevant Conclusion (Argumentum Ad Ignoratio Elenchi) - When the premises miss the point, purporting to support one conclusion while in fact supporting or establishing another e.g. In court, Thompson testifies that the defendant is a honorable person, who wouldnt harm a flea. The defense attorney rises to say for which the first conclusion is irrelevant. B. FALLACIES OF PRESUMPTION (FALLACIES OF ILLICIT ASSERTION) - mistaken arguments arise from reliance upon some proposition that is assumed to be true but is in fact false, dubious or without warrant P.1 Complex Question - question asked in such a way as to presuppose the truth of some assumption buried in that question e.g Lawyer: The figures seem to indicate that your sales increased as a result of these misleading advertisements. Is that correct? Witness: They did not! Lawyer: But you admit, then that your advertising was misleading P.2 False Cause - when one treats as the cause of a thing what is not really the cause of that things, blunder in reasoning is based upon casual relations - fallacy that implies that what is not the cause is assumed to be the cause of something e.g. The death penalty in the USA has given us the highest crime rate and greatest number of prisoners per 100 000 population in the industrialized world. P.3 Begging the Question (Petitio Principi) - when one assumes in the premises of an argument the truth of what one seeks to establish in the conclusion of that argument - a form of circular reasoning e.g There is no such things as knowledge which cannot be carried into practice, for such knowledge is really knowledge at all. Communism is the best form of government because it alone takes care of the interest of the common people. P.4 Fallacy of Accident - when one applies a generalization to an individual case that does not properly govern - a wrong application of the general rule to circumstantial (accidental) cases or situation e.g. Take my son, Martin. Hes been eating fish, chips his whole life, and he just have a cholesterol test, and his level is below the national average, what better proof could there be that a fryers son. Black is a color. Nigerians are black. So Nigerians are colors. P.5 Fallacy of Converse Accident - when one moves carelessly or too quickly from a single case to an indefensible broad generalization - from circumstantial cases you draw a general rule or statement e.g A young girl unhappy experience with her boyfriend made her established a general rule that boys are unworthy to be trusted. C. FALLACIES OF AMBIGUITY (FALLACIES OF EXPRESSION) - mistaken arguments are formulated in such a way as to rely on shifts in the meaning of words or phrases, from their use

in the premises to their conclusion. C.1 Fallacy of Equivocation - when the same word, or phrase is used has more than one meanings, deliberately or accidentally in the formulation of an argument e.g. An elephant is an animal; ergo a small elephant is a small animal. C.2 Fallacy of Amphiboly - when one of the statements in an argument has more than one plausible meaning, because of the loose or awkward way in which the words in the statement have been combined e.g The farmer blew out his brains after taking affectionate farewell to his family with a shotgun. C.3 Fallacy of Accent - when the shift of meaning arises within an argument as a consequence of changes in the emphasis given to its words or parts e.g Please dont stop kissing me. C.4 Fallacy of Composition (Hasty Generalization) - when one reasons mistakenly from the attributes of a part to the attributes of the whole e.g Ive met two people in Nicaragua sa far, and they were both nice to me. So all people I will meet in Nicaragua will be nice to me.

Похожие интересы