Ch3-Ch4 - Chapter 3 Notes Logical Fallacies Evaluating...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–4. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Chapter 3 Notes Logical Fallacies Evaluating Arguments The two ways an argument can fail: o One of the premises (reasons) is untrue o The conclusion doesn’t follow form premises “Fallacy” defined: o A common error in reasoning… Aristotle’s Analysis o When the reasoning is flawed, then the argument is said to be fallacious Two types of Fallacies o Formal—errors in argument structure o Informal—errors in relationship between premises and conclusions; can depend  on context. o We’re examining informal fallacies today. Informal Fallacies o Fallacies of Relevance The error resides in the relation between the evidence and the conclusion  drawn from it. Argument from Ignorance o The idea that a proposition is true simply because it hasn’t been proved false or  visa versa (false because it hasn’t been proven true.) Straw Person
Background image of page 1

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

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
o A misstatement of another’s argument ot make it appear weaker than it is. Converse Accident o Faulty relationships between generalizations and specifics, viz., incorrectly using a specific case to prove a generalization. Appeal to Emotion o Replacing informative discourse with expressive discourse. Appeal to a “mob mentality”—everyone else is doing it, or an appeal to vanity. Versions of Appeal to Emotion o Appeal to Pity—attempting to play on mercy or altruism. o Appeal to Force—an implicit or overt threat is used in place of actual reasons. False Dichotomy o Attempting ot establish a conclusion by allowing for only two alternatives “You’re either with us or you’re against us.” Complex Question o Asking a question is such a way as to presuppose the truth of some conclusion buried in that question. “Do you still beat your wife?” “Don’t your children deserve Crest?” Ad Hominem-To the Person o Genetic fallacy-attacking the source (genesis). Assault on the character of an opponent (she committed adultery, so her argument about X is false). o Circumstantial or tu quoque-attacking an opponent as a hypocrite (not relevant to the validity of the argument itself). False Cause (Post Hoc)
Background image of page 2
o Mistakes in causal relations, especially oversimplifying  a cause, or claiming  causation when only a correlation exists. The fact that Event A was followed by event B does not mean Event A  CAUSED Event B. Be wary of claims based on statistical analyses…easy to bend statistics  to meet preferred conclusions. Begging the Question o Circular reasoning. Assuming the truth of a proposition in an attempt to prove it. Essentially A because A
Background image of page 3

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

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
Image of page 4
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

This note was uploaded on 04/08/2008 for the course LAIS 220 taught by Professor Woodson during the Spring '08 term at Mines.

Page1 / 16

Ch3-Ch4 - Chapter 3 Notes Logical Fallacies Evaluating...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 4. Sign up to view the full document.

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