Informal fallacies

Fallacy is an error in reasoning. Fallacy is a type of an argument that may seem to be correct, but that proves, on examination, not to be so. (I MCopi)

Def cont
To claim that an argument commits a fallacy is a strong form of criticism implying that the argument has committed a serious logical error, and even more strongly implying that the argument is based on an underlying flaw or misconception of reasoning, and can therefore be refuted. (Douglas Walton) A fallacy is a failure to provide adequate proof for a belief. However, the failure is disguised in various forms using different strategies to make a proof look adequate. (Polycarp Ikuenobe)

Formal fallacies
Formal logic deals with formal fallacies. A formal fallacy demonstrates that the form of an argument is not correct; therefore, the entailment relation between premises and conclusion can not be established.

Informal fallacies
Informal logic discusses informal fallacies. The most common categories of informal fallacies have been listed as: Relevance, Presumption, Ambiguity, and Weak Induction. An argument commits fallacy of relevance when its premises are not logically relevant to its conclusion. Psychological or emotional relevance is not the same as logical relevance.

 In fallacies of presumption, there are unwarranted assumptions that the argument depends upon, causing the fallacy. Premises assume the truth of some un-stated statement/s without any justification, and then a conclusion is drawn on the basis of the un-stated statement/s.

 In fallacy of ambiguity, also known as linguistic fallacies, there is unclear or improper use of language or sentence structure. This lack of clarity leads to different possible interpretations, and, in turn, an incorrect conclusion is drawn. In fallacies of weak induction the arguer presents premises that are so weak that they cannot support the conclusion.

1. Fallacies of false generalization

When an arguer moves carelessly or too quickly from or towards a generalization. 1a. Fallacy of accident is committed when an arguer moves carelessly/intentionally from a generalization to a particular circumstance, special in character. 1b. Fallacy of Converse Accident also known Hasty Generalization is committed when an arguer carelessly/intentionally moves from special particular circumstances to generalization.

2. Argument against man

Argument against Man is committed when an argument is judged on the basis of the person who puts forward the argument. 2a. An argument against man is ad hominem (abusive ) when the personal character of a person is considered, while evaluating an argument. 2b An Argument against Man is Circumstantial when, special circumstances of an arguer (which have nothing to do with argument) are considered while evaluating his/her argument. 2c. you too , is a fallacy in which one rejects the argument /criticism by turning the argument/criticism back against the opponent. It is a very effective fallacy because it puts the opponent on the defensive.

Argument against man cont

2d In the bias type of attack, the arguer is said to have a personal bias, often in the form of a financial interest or something to gain. 2e. the poisoning the well type of ad hominem is a pre-emptive type of attack which disqualifies an arguer before he/she says something. ( Only a fool will disagree)

3. Slippery slope
Slippery slope, also known camel nose , is committed when it is argued that if we accept P it will be followed by Q, and if we accept Q, R will follow, and R is something undesirable/bad/unacceptable/objectionable etc, therefore, P should not be accepted.

4. Complex question
The fallacy of the complex question, occurs in a kind of case where a complex question that is, a question having several parts, is asked in such a way that, if the respondent answers it directly, he/she will be trapped. Loaded question- YES- NO

5. False Dilemma
False Dilemma, is committed when an arguer offers an incomplete range of alternatives (normally two- in such a way, that it appears, as if they are mutually exclusive), and then one is asked to chose one of them. The nations of the world will decide, either they are with us or with terrorists.

6. Begging the Question

Begging the Question is committed where the arguer provides insufficient support for the conclusion in the premises. Premises and conclusion say the same thing but in some what different language when the premises themselves are in need of a proof

7. Appeal to authority
Appeal to authority, also known as Appeal to Irrelevant Authority or Wrong Authority is committed when the authority on the basis of which an argument is accepted/rejected is not competent/ trustworthy.

8. Fallacy of Ignorance
Fallacy of Ignorance is committed when argued; any claim X is true because no one has ever proved it false, or, X is false because it has never been proved true. Shifting the Burden of Proof.

9. Appeal to emotions
Appeal to Force is committed when an arguer argues that if his/her argument is not accepted then consequences will follow (against the interest of the listeners/readers). Appeal to Pity. Appeal to popularity. Appeal to fear Appeal to flattery.

10. Irrelevant Conclusion

Irrelevant Conclusion or Fallacy of Missing the Point is committed when an arguer provides ground for one conclusion, but infers a quiet irrelevant conclusion by vaguely relating this new conclusion with the premises Present democratically elected government ..... democracy is bad.

11. Red herring

Red herring is committed when the arguer diverts the attention of the reader or listener by changing the subject to some totally different issue. Something intended to divert attention from the real problem or matter at hand; a misleading clue.

12. Straw Man

Straw Man is committed when one misinterprets the opponent s argument, and then attacks the misinterpreted position rather than the one the opponent holds. Representation form Selection form

13. Definitional Retreat

This fallacy is committed when an arguer changes the meaning of the words in order to deal with objections raised against the original wordings. A: I am not an addict. B: I saw you smoking marijuana last night. A: Oh, You cannot call marijuana a drug. It s a part of our culture.

14. Suppressed evidence

A good argument must not ignore or suppress important facts or evidences, by including which an argument may support a different conclusion. For example, an employee argues: he was absent since he was in hospital, therefore, no disciplinary action should be taken against him. (he actually went to the hospital to see his friend)