Lecture4-Fallacies

Lecture4-Fallacies - Fallacies Affirming the Consequent An...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–2. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Fallacies Affirming the Consequent An argument where the consequent of an if-statement is affirmed and the antecedent proven Examples: 1. If Bill Gates owns Fort Knox , then he is rich 2. Bill Gates is rich. 3. Therefore, Bill Gates owns Fort Knox. Compare to a good argument: 1. If Bill Gates own Fort Knox then he is rich 2. Bill Gates owns Fort Knox 3. So, Bill Gates is rich Ad Hominem Argument attacking the character or motives of a person who has states an idea, rather than the idea itself. Examples: "The members of the opposition are a couple of fascists!" 1. Bill Gates has argued that taxes should be lowered; 2. He has done so only because he stands to benefit from the policy change 3. So, we have no reason to think we should lower taxes (or we shouldn’t lowered) Guilt by association: 1. Ron Paul [Republican Candidate] believes in minimal government 2. Anarchists also believe in minimal government and they are clearly wrong 3. So, Ron Paul’s views are mistaken Issue: How can we attack the credibility of a source? Al Gore says that CO2 emissions are risings. He is not an expert, is his argument an ad hominem? Non Sequitur
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
Image of page 2
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

This note was uploaded on 11/07/2011 for the course ENC 1101 taught by Professor Myself during the Fall '08 term at University of Florida.

Page1 / 4

Lecture4-Fallacies - Fallacies Affirming the Consequent An...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 2. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online