Class Notes Monday 1/24

In class Monday January 24 we covered several types of
common fallacies used in arguments.
To begin, a common fallacy by definition is a misconception
resulting from incorrect reasoning.
The first was faulty cause (post hoc ergo propter hoc) is a
mistake correlation, or assuming that because one thing
followed another the latter was caused by the first. An
example of this is that a black cat crossed John's path in
the morning, at night he was in a car accident because he
had bad luck.
Hasty, or sweeping generalization, assumes that what is true
of the whole will also be true of the part, or what is true
in most incidences is true in all incidences. It is bases
inferences on too small of a sample for accurate
representation
Faulty analogy, literal or figurative, assumes that because
two things are alike in some respects, they are alike in all
respects. So what that the pioneers had to kill a couple
Indians, you can't make an omelet without breaking a few
eggs.
Appeal to ignorance (argumentum ad ignorantiam attempts to
use the component's inability to disprove a conclusion as
proof of validity of the conclusion. A common example of
where this fallacy is used is in that of God's existence,
as an atheist might say you cannot prove his existence,
therefore he does not exist.
Appeal to pity takes place when the arguer tried to get
people tp accept a conclusion by making them feel sorry for
something. The example used in class is if you get a bad
grade on the exam, and beg Dr. Layne to give you a better
grade because your great aunt died, your car broke down, or
you've had the flu.
Appeal to force (ad baculum) basically states that if you do
not agree with the arguers view, bad things will happen to
you.
Bifurcation, or false dilemma, assumes that two categories
are mutually exclusive and exhaustive, you must choose one
or another, and there are no other options and no middle
ground. One of two outcomes is inevitable, and both have
their own negative consequences. A political example of this
would be that either you favor a strong national defense, or
you favor allowing other nations to dictate foreign policy.
Ad hominem, or damning the source, attempts to refute an
argument by slandering the source of the argument rather
than the substance of the argument itself. The example used
in class was that there is no reason to listen to those who
oppose school prayer, because they are atheists.
Tu quoque (look who's talking or two wrongs make a right)
is pointing to a similar wrong or error committed by
another. For example, your father smoked marijuana in the
'60s so who is he to tell you not to do drugs?
Equivocation allows the key word or term in an argument to
shift meaning mid argument so that in the end it does not
connect with the meaning of that word in the premise. An
example would be man is rational, no woman is a man, and
therefore no woman is rational.
Begging the question (petitio principii) entails making an
argument, the conclusion of which is based on an unstated or
unproven assumption. In question form this fallacy is known
as Complex Question. A common example of this would be
abortion is murder, since killing a baby is an act of
murder.
Tautology (a sub category of circular argument) is defining
terms on qualifying an argument in such a way that it would
be impossible to disprove the argument, it is basically a
restatement of the conclusion. For example, the Bible is the
word of God because the Bible says it is so.
Appeal to authority attempts to justify an argument by
citing a highly admired or well known, but not necessarily
qualified, who supports the conclusion being offered. If
it's good enough for Obama, it's good enough for me!
Appeal to tradition (don't rock the boat) is based on the
principle of "letting to sleeping dogs lie" or it is
best to do things as they have been done in the past.
Appeal to the crowd (ad populum or playing to the gallery)
refers to a popular opinion of majority sentiment in order
to support a claim.
Straw hat is stating an opponent's argument in an extreme
or exaggerated form, or attacking a weaker, irrelevant
portion of an opponent's argument.
Slippery slope (snowball argument) suggests that if one step
or action is taking it will invariably lead to similar steps
or actions. If abortion is allowed, before we know it, so
will euthanasia.