Informal Fallacies

INFORMAL
FALLACIES
FALLACIES
 A fallacy is a frequently committed mistake in reasoning.
 We can roughly classify fallacies into three main groups:
Fallacies of Irrelevance, Fallacies of Presumption, and
Fallacies of Ambiguity.
FALLACIES OF IRRELEVANCE
Fallacies of Irrelevance are the simplest to

understand. They present evidence that is not
really relevant in establishing the claim for
which they are arguing.
FALLACIES OF PRESUMPTION
 The Fallacies of Presumption make unwarranted assumptions in
their premises. With these fallacies the problem is not that the
evidence has no bearing on the claim we are trying to establish.
Instead, it is that we are presuming something we shouldn't be
presuming
FALLACIES OF AMBIGUITY
 Fallacies of Ambiguity, is the most difficult to recognize. They all
involve a mistake in reasoning that is based on a misunderstanding
about meaning.
THE FALLACIES
OF IRRELEVANCE
1. ARGUMENTUM AD
HOMINEM
 The Argumentum ad Hominem is an easy fallacy to
recognize. It consists in an attack (i.e., an insult) on
the person who disagrees with us. The Latin translates
as "an argument to the man." We prefer, however, to
call it an attack on the man, or against the man.
1. ARGUMENTUM AD
HOMINEM
2. ARGUMENTUM AD
BACULUM
 Argumentum ad Baculum is an attack on
an individual or group of individuals.
Instead of verbal abuse, however, the
appeal here is to force.
3. ARGUMENTUM AD
POPULUM
 Argumentum ad Populum consists in an attempt to justify a
claim by appealing to sentiments that large groups of people
have in common. Three versions of this fallacy are especially
important.
 The first we call "Flag Waving." It appeals to the sentiment of
nationalism (or patriotism).
 The second version of this fallacy is "Snob Appeal." It plays on
our desire to be a little superior to, or better than, others.
 Finally, the third version we call "Bandwagoning." It appeals to
our feeling of wanting to belong to the crowd.
3. ARGUMENTUM AD
POPULUM
4. TU QUOQUE FALLACY
 We usually commit the Tu Quoque (or You're Another) when we are
trying to get ourselves off the moral hook.
 The form it takes is “You do it too. So it's okay for me to do it.”
5. FALLACY OF POISONING
THE WELL
 The Fallacy of Poisoning the Well occurs when we try to prevent
another person from contributing anything to the discussion,
because of the circumstances in which they find themselves. We
reason, for example, that he is a general in the Army, so he will
naturally have a certain bias. We can, therefore, discard his
testimony.
5. FALLACY OF POISONING
THE WELL
6. ARGUMENTUM AD
IGNORANTIAM:
 The form the Argumentum ad Ignorantiam, or
Argument from Ignorance, has is: No one has ever
proven that it's this way. Therefore, it must be the other
way.
 For example, "No one has ever established that
Fermat's Last Theorem is really a theorem. So it must
not be one."
6. ARGUMENTUM AD
IGNORANTIAM:
7. ARGUMENTUM AD
MISERICORDIAM
 The Argumentum ad Misericordiam,
or Appeal to Pity, is surely an easily
recognized fallacy. Its premises
simply consist in verbal crying.
From this we are supposed to
conclude whatever the arguer asks
us to.
8. RED HERRING FALLACY
 The argument does not draw that
conclusion. Instead, comes up with a
completely different one, and one for
which the premises provide no support.
 The fallacy probably gets its name
from the fact that escaped convicts
smear herring on their bodies, in an
attempt to throw the dogs off the scent.
THE FALLACIES
OF PRESUMPTION
1. BEGGING THE QUESTION
 This is a fallacy in which the premises include the claim that the conclusion is true (directly on
indirectly) or assume that the conclusion is true.
2. FALLACY OF ACCIDENT
 This fallacy arises when what is accidental is confused with what is
essential.
3. FALLACY OF FALSE CAUSE
 has the form: "Phenomenon X has occurred, after which Y
occurred. Therefore, X caused Y."
 The fact that two phenomena have been found to occur in
nature together is relevant in deciding that one of these is
a cause of the other. It is a presumption, however, to
believe that this is all the evidence we need to establish
this claim.
FALLACY OF FALSE CAUSE
FALLACY OF COMPLEX
QUESTION
 This fallacy is committed when a single
question that is actually of two (or more)
separate questions is asked and the single
answer is then applied to both question.
 MARTHA: He must be guilty. When I

asked him why he did it, he didn't answer
me.
FALLACIES OF
AMBIGUITY
ACCENT OR PROSODY
 Arises when a false stress of voice is placed upon a given word in
order to mislead, confuse or produce a wrong interpretation.
 “I’m going to the beach to day.”

AMPHIBOLY
 Occurs when the premises used in an argument are ambiguous
because of careless or ungrammatical phrasing. It is a statement
with double meaning.
AMPHIBOLY
THE FALLACY OF
COMPOSITION
 The Fallacy of Composition is committed when we mistakenly
reason that what is true of the parts must, therefore, be true of the
whole.
THE FALLACY OF DIVISION
 The Fallacy of Division is committed when we mistakenly reason
that what is true of the whole must, therefore, be true of the parts.
THE FALLACY OF COMPOSITION
& DIVISION
FALLACY OF FIGURE OF
SPEECH
 Occurs when one concludes that a similarity in the construction of
one term with another establishes a corresponding similarity in their
meanings.
FALLACY OF HASTY
GENERALIZATION
 Occurs when the arguer makes a sweeping conclusion from a few
instances or cases. The truths in the individual cases cited by the
arguer are insufficient to represent a universal truth.

Informal Fallacies

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Informal Fallacies

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Informal Fallacies

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

INFORMAL

Fallacies of Irrelevance are the simplest to

 MARTHA: He must be guilty. When I

 “I’m going to the beach to day.”

You might also like