INFORMAL FALLACIES

I. THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN FORMAL AND INFORMAL FALLACIES

The word fallacy is used by logicians to refer to errors of reasoning. It comes form the Latin word fallere, which
means ‘’to deceive ’’. Specifically, the term is used to refer to arguments which fail to establish firm foundations
respective conclusions. There are two classifications of fallacies as they are committed within or under two distinct types
of arguments namely, formal and informal.

Formal fallacies belong to formal logic where the validity of an argument (syllogism) is tested through its
‘’structure’’ or ‘’form’’. The traditional rules are meant to guide an arguer in formulating, or even in evaluating, a
syllogism, and in so doing, failure to follow them would mean committing an error (fallacy). Rule 1 determines the
number of terms (three terms only) ;rules 2 and 3 are concerned with the ‘’distribution of terms’’; rules 4 and 5 with the
‘’quality of statements’’ (affirmative/negative), and rule 6 with the ‘’quantity of statements ’’(universal/particular).

Informal fallacies are errors in reasoning which can be seen more in the ‘’content’’ of an argument rather than
on its ‘’structure’’ or ‘’form’’. Accordingly, an argument is evaluated based on the reasoning (idea) that it contains,
which is technically referred to as ‘’evidence’’. Evidence is an important aspect of an argument without which a
‘pertinent’ and ‘valid’ conclusion cannot be drawn. It is, d to therefore evaluated according to its relevance, sufficiency
and the manner (language or the use of thereof) by which it is presented. As a rule, arguing parties are expected to stick
to whatever issue being argued upon, which means that they are to be present only pertinent evidence to support their
conclusion. Deviation, intentionally or not, from the issue by way of irrelevant, insufficient and wrongly expressed
evidence would mean committing an ‘’informal fallacy’’.

II. INFORMAL FALLACIES

A. FALLACIES OF RELEVANCE

The fallacies of relevance are traditionally known as ignoratio elenchi (ignorance of what is needed to
establish a conclusion). These fallacies share a common characteristic of presenting irrelevant premises contributing to
the inadmissibility of a conclusion. In some cases, these fallacies may contain premises that are psychologically
relevant, however, the gesture of committing such fallacies, whether intentionally or unintentionally, must be taken only
as an emotional appeal virtually undermining the need to produce genuine evidence.

1. Argumentum Ad Misericordiam

Appeal to pity. This fallacy is committed when instead of presenting the necessary evidence to support a
conclusion, the arguer would rather resort to his/her miseries or impoverished situations thereby evoking pity from
the listener in an effort to convince him/her to accept the conclusion. However, some arguments that attempt to
solicit sympathy or compassion differ from the fallacies appeal to pity in that they supply information about why
that person in question deserves special consideration. Any attempt like this should not prevent the listener or
anyone concerned from extending help or giving special consideration to the person in question.

Example:
Student to Teacher: I admit that I cheated during the exam, but if you will give me a failing grade then I will lose
my scholarship and probably discontinue my studies. My family is very poor and the meager income of my father
from farming is barely enough for our food. There is no way we can pay for my tuition fees. Sir, please do not fail
me.

2. Argumentum Ad Hominem

Appeal to character or Argument Against the Person. This fallacy involves two arguers where one of them directs
his attention to the other arguer himself instead of attacking the issue at hand. This can happen by verbally
abusing (adhominem abusive) the opponent or by alluding to certain circumstances (adhominem
circumstantial) that affect the opponent. The fallacy might as well be committed by the arguer whose person is
being attacked if he returns the attack in the same manner (tu quoque, ‘’you too’’).
 Example:
Arguer 1: Smoking should be banned in all public places.
Arguer 2: There is no way you can convince me with what you are saying because you yourself smoke a lot and
at all places! (abusive).
Arguer 1: Banning in public places can prevent non-smokers from inhaling second-hand smoke which is proven to
be more dangerous than first hand-smoke.
Arguer 2: Teachers are chain smokers. Naturally you speak that way because you want to protect your children!
(circumstantial).
Arguer 1: I know you would reject my proposal because you are afraid your business will go down. I am fully
aware that your grocery store situated in front of a school profits so much from cigarettes. You are very selfish and
thinking only of yourself! (“you too”).

3. Argumentum Ad Populum

Appeal to People. This fallacy occurs when a proposition is characterized by an appeal to popular opinions or
sentiments. The fallacy can occur in several ways and one of which is when o proposition is claimed to be true
because most, if not all, people believe it to be true. It can happen even in cases where everyone claims that a
proposition must be true and yet it is not. If everyone were to believe that the sun is made of ice, that would not
make it a big ball of ice.
Example 1:
Student :” I will buy a cell phone unit because everybody has it”,
Another form of fallacy occurs when one accepts or rejects something because most people do. This form of
argumentum ad popularum is often the basis of advertisers in attracting potential buyers specifically when they
say that their product is preferred by more people than any other product.
Example 2:
Advertiser: “Why risk buying product x when our product is preferred by more housewives in the world?”
It can also happen that politicians take advantage of this kind of argumentation during campaign periods. It
occurs whenever a politician uses “plain folks” arguments, that is, claiming belongingness to or identification with
the people.
Example 3: “I know exactly who you are, what you need and what your dreams are because I am just an
ordinary fellow like you. I belong to you and so I am more qualified to represent you in the congress. ”

4. Argumentum Ad Baculum
Appeal Force. The fallacy is committed when relevant evidence is substituted by an appeal to fear or
intimidation. The arguer poses a conclusion to a person and argues further by directly or indirectly threatening the
latter. The threat can either be physical or psychological and it is meant to force the listener into accepting the
conclusion.
Example 1:
Employee to Boss:” I deserve a raise in salary. Just to remind you of what I know about you and your secretary. I
am very much aware of your activities after office hours. Beside, your wife and I are best friends so it will only take
a cup of coffee for her to know everything.”
Example 2:”If you will not marry me then I will not think twice about taking my own life! ”

5. Argumentum Ad Verecundiam

Appeal to Wrong Authority. The fallacy occurs when a testimony from an unqualified authority is used to support a
conclusion. As a rule, in order for a testimony to be accepted it should be given by an expert or legitimate
authority depending on the issue being testified upon. However, it can happen that a single person may have
more than one expertise so his/her testimony can still be accepted even though he/she does not have the
appropriate title.

Being irrelevant, the fallacy can also become just an insufficient fallacy in cases where practically no one can be
considered as sole authority. Issues like politics, morals and , the call for no specific authority just as there is no
conventional wisdom applicable to any of them.

Example:
 Argure:”Attorney Diaz, the famous lawyer, has stated that upbringing of children necessities proper healthcare
which means a good supply of vitamins, dental care, regular visits to clinic and a balance intake of nutritious
food. In view of his expertise as lawyer , we must conclude that it is indeed true.”

6. Argumentum Ad Ignorantiam

Appeal to Ignorance. The fallacy occurs in two ways: firstly the argument that a proposition is true because no
one has proven that it is false and secondly, the argument that a proposition is false because no one has proven
that it is true.
Example:
Arguer:”People have been trying for centuries to provide a conclusive evidence for the claims of astrology, so far
no one has succeeded. Therefore, astrology is a lot of nonsense. ”
7. Non Sequitur
It does not follow. The fallacy is committed when in a certain argument the conclusion does not follow logically or
psychologically from the premises.
Example:
Arguer: My feet are painful , therefore I cannot eat

8. Use Of Flattery
The fallacy is committed when attempts to persuade others by engaging in excessive praise of people instead of
presenting for one’s view.
Example:
Arguer:”That, in sum is my proposal, ladies and gentlemen. You know that i trust and value your judgement, and I
am aware that i could not find a more astute panel of expertise to evaluate mu suggestions. Thank you.”

B. FALLACIES OF SUFFICIENCY
Fallacies of insufficient evidence occurs not in the same manner as fallacies of relevance, and they do not
produce the same impact on a conclusion: fallacies of relevance would rather render a conclusion inadmissible
because of premises that are logically irrelevant while fallacies of insufficient evidence will not weaken a
conclusion because of premises /evidence that is not adequate enough to fully support it.

1. Hasty Generalization
The fallacy occurs when a conclusion concerning all the members of a group is drawn from evidence that
pertains to a selected or limited sample. As it should be, a limited sample is not representative of the whole, which
is also on conformity with the Aristotelian square of opposition where the truth of the universal implies the truth of
the particular, but not the way around.
Example:
Arguer: “Two weeks ago Mr. Masungit was accused of stealing the cell phone of his seat mate. Just this morning,
Mr. Masungit was seen extending his arm towards the pocket of another student. Clearly, he is someone to be
feared of and should be avoided. ”
2. Accident
The fallacy is committed when a general rule is applied to a particular situation. It should be noted that the
fallacy does not consist of arguing from a generalization to a specific instance of that generalization, it is arguing
from generalization to a special case.
Example:
Arguer:”While it is a crime to physically abuse someone, it is obvious that Manny Pacquiao is a criminal because
he physically attacks his opponents during bouts. ”
(Physical attack is accidental to the profession of Manny Pacquiao as a boxer which would render the general
rule concerning physical abuse inapplicable.)

3. False Cause

The fallacy occurs when a premises contains an affirmation of the belief that a particular situation is always
caused by another situation. The fallacy may occur in different forms: post hoc ergo propter hoc (“after this,
therefore on account of this ”), presupposes that just because one event precedes another event the first event
causes the second event; non causa pro causa (“not the cause for the cause”), when an effect is taken
mistakenly as the cause.
 The fallacy may come very convincing due to the difficulty of determining relationship of events not to mention
the difficulty of establishing which causing which.

Example: (post hoc ergo)

Arguer: “Every time I bring an umbrella with me it would not rain and if I do not bring my umbrella it would rain.
Therefore, I will always bring my umbrella so it will not rain.”

Example 2: (non causa pro causa)

Arguer: “Deserving nursing students are assured of slots in the list incoming third years. Accordingly, every first and
second year nursing students should be assured of a slot in the list so they will study hard.”

4. False Dichotomy
The fallacy is also referred to as the “either-or fallacy”. It is committed when the premises of an argument
contains two usually extreme alternative thereby creating the impression that there is no more room for any other
alternative. Usually the arguer intends to force the listener into accepting the alternative which is favourable (to
the arguer), the listener, then, would have no choice but to accept unless he could risk accepting the
undesirable one.
Example:
Mother of Child: “Either you will enroll in St. Louis University or forget about acquiring a college degree! I
graduated from that university then it must be the right place for you!“

5. Weak Analogy
Even though it is generally accepted that analogy is a way to explain or clarify a point in discussion or
conversation for it brings out similarities of two situations (one situation illuminating another situation), it cannot
fully support a conclusion of an argument, that is two or more things maybe similar in some respects but it does
not follow that they can still be similar in other respects. Accordingly, if a conclusion is dependent entirely then it is
to be considered weak.
Example:
Arguer: “Having a wife is like owning a kite and letting it fly. You let her go wherever she wishes and do whatever
she wants but you are still in control. Imagine a kite without a rope to control it. It will surely fly freely and most
probably, disappear forever, and so with your wife. ”

6. Suppressed Evidence
The fallacy is committed whenever an arguer presents evidence in support of one conclusion, or one side of the
issue, while ignoring or suppressing evidence that would support another conclusion. Usually, this fallacy is
committed consciously by salesman whose intentions is to convince potential customers into buying their
products.
Example:
Landlady: “I have one of the best apartment units in this area of the city. They are regularly maintained and
potential tenants are usually screened as to their behaviors and characters. Surely, you will like having one of the
units. ”
(The Landlady may have ignored or intentionally suppressed other matters like problems concerning supply of
water and electricity, or that there is an obligatory monthly increased.)

7. Begging the Question:

There are several ways of committing this fallacy but common to these possibilities is the failure to ask a question
or set of questions before attempting to arrive at a conclusion. Because of the absence or intentional omission of
the question/s wrong conclusion due to confusion is deemed likely to occur.
a. Complex Question
This form of “begging the question fallacy” occurs when an arguer poses a question that presupposes an
answer that is meant for a question that has not been asked.
Example:
Lawyer to the accused: “Did you enjoy raping Maria?”
(The accused will be obliged to answer either yes or no but whatever his answer would be it is meant for
another question, that is the answer begs another question like, “Did you rape Maria?” )
 b. Assuming Too Much
This form occurs when a “questionable” premise is presented to support a conclusion. The premise is
usually a generalization, or “too much of an assumption” about a subject. A prominent indicator of this
fallacy is the quantifier “all“.
Example:
Arguer: ”All men are polygamous. Mr. Ladia is a man. Therefore, Mr. Ladia is a polygamous. ”
(The first premise begs the question,”How does the arguer arrive at the assumption that all men are
polygamous“)
c. Circular Argument (petition principii)
The fallacy occurs when someone is arguing in circles, that is, he uses the conclusion to support the
premise in the same way that he uses that same premise to prove the validity of that same conclusion. It
can also be observed that in such case the proposition is affirmed twice resulting to nothing but
deception or confusion. In short, it begs practical questions, “What, or where, is the point?”
Example:
Arguer: ”Our teacher is insane because he is crazy, and he is crazy because he is insane.”

8. Fallacy of Novelty
It consists in assuming that a new idea, law, policy, or action is better simply because it is new.
Example:
Arguer: “Good Taste Restaurant is now under new management. I’m sure the foods being offered there are now
much cheaper and more delicious than before. ”

C. FALLACIES OF EXPRESSION

1. Equivocation
The fallacy is committed when a single term is used two or more meanings in the same argument. It consists of the
use of word that has the same spelling or sound but the meaning is different parts of the inference. It operates in
using a term in a premise with the intentions of tricking the person in accepting the terms as though its natural part
of the argument.
Examples:
A. Jasmin is a flower. My little baby is Jasmin. Therefore, my little baby is a flower.
B. A paper is light. What is light cannot be dark. Therefore, a paper cannot be dark.
2. Amphiboly
The fallacy involves the use of sentences which can be interpreted in multiple ways with equal justification. Also
known as “Fallacy of Ambiguity.” This fallacy is committed when there is an ambiguous use of phrase or a
sentence.
Examples:
A. The female student said to her male teacher. ”Sir go out.” Is she asking permission that she will go out? Or
trying to command or tell her teacher that he will go out?
B. She is cold.
3. Composition
The fallacy is committed when one assumes that what holds the true individuals also holds true of the group.
Example:
The human body is made up of cells, which are invisible to the naked eye. Therefore, the human body is invincible.
4. Division
The fallacy is committed when one assumes that what holds true of a group automatically holds true of all the
individuals in that group
Example:
All human beings are conscious entities. Therefore, the cells in our bodies are conscious entities.
5. Accent
The fallacy is committed when one changes the stress in the statement, thereby creating a misunderstanding or
confusion to the listener.
Examples:
A. No U-turn
B. I resent her question
C. Woman without her man is lost.