1 / 38

Name that Fallacy

1. Equivocation 2. Non Sequitur (“does not follow”) 3. Post Hoc, Ergo Propter Hoc (“after this, therefore because of this”) 4. Hasty Generalization 5. Slippery Slope 6. False Analogy 7. Straw Man 8. Special Pleading 9.Begging the Question 10. False Dichotomy/Dilemma 11. Red Herring

lel
Télécharger la présentation

Name that Fallacy

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. 1. Equivocation 2. Non Sequitur (“does not follow”) 3. Post Hoc, Ergo Propter Hoc (“after this, therefore because of this”) 4. Hasty Generalization 5. Slippery Slope 6. False Analogy 7. Straw Man 8. Special Pleading 9.Begging the Question 10. False Dichotomy/Dilemma 11. Red Herring 12. TuQuoque (“you, too”) 13. Poisoning the Well 14. Ad Hominem (“against the person”) 15. Appeal to Authority 16. Appeal to Fear Name that Fallacy Advanced Composition: Critical Reasoning & Writing

  2. 1. Equivocation 2. Non Sequitur (“does not follow”) 3. Post Hoc, Ergo Propter Hoc (“after this, therefore because of this”) 4. Hasty Generalization 5. Slippery Slope 6. False Analogy 7. Straw Man 8. Special Pleading 9.Begging the Question 10. False Dichotomy/Dilemma 11. Red Herring 12. TuQuoque (“you, too”) 13. Poisoning the Well 14. Ad Hominem (“against the person”) 15. Appeal to Authority 16. Appeal to Fear Definition: Attacking the person rather than the argument or the issue.

  3. 1. Equivocation 2. Non Sequitur (“does not follow”) 3. Post Hoc, Ergo Propter Hoc (“after this, therefore because of this”) 4. Hasty Generalization 5. Slippery Slope 6. False Analogy 7. Straw Man 8. Special Pleading 9.Begging the Question 10. False Dichotomy/Dilemma 11. Red Herring 12. TuQuoque (“you, too”) 13. Poisoning the Well 14. Ad Hominem (“against the person”) 15. Appeal to Authority 16. Appeal to Fear Definition: Individual offered as evidence, solely based on reputation OR Individual offered as expert is not an expert on the issue in dispute

  4. 1. Equivocation 2. Non Sequitur (“does not follow”) 3. Post Hoc, Ergo Propter Hoc (“after this, therefore because of this”) 4. Hasty Generalization 5. Slippery Slope 6. False Analogy 7. Straw Man 8. Special Pleading 9.Begging the Question 10. False Dichotomy/Dilemma 11. Red Herring 12. TuQuoque (“you, too”) 13. Poisoning the Well 14. Ad Hominem (“against the person”) 15. Appeal to Authority 16. Appeal to Fear Definition: Shifts the meaning of a word or phrase in a single argument

  5. 1. Equivocation 2. Non Sequitur (“does not follow”) 3. Post Hoc, Ergo Propter Hoc (“after this, therefore because of this”) 4. Hasty Generalization 5. Slippery Slope 6. False Analogy 7. Straw Man 8. Special Pleading 9.Begging the Question 10. False Dichotomy/Dilemma 11. Red Herring 12. TuQuoque (“you, too”) 13. Poisoning the Well 14. Ad Hominem (“against the person”) 15. Appeal to Authority 16. Appeal to Fear Definition: Make a claim from a sample that is too small or in someway unrepresentative of target population

  6. 1. Equivocation 2. Non Sequitur (“does not follow”) 3. Post Hoc, Ergo Propter Hoc (“after this, therefore because of this”) 4. Hasty Generalization 5. Slippery Slope 6. False Analogy 7. Straw Man 8. Special Pleading 9.Begging the Question 10. False Dichotomy/Dilemma 11. Red Herring 12. TuQuoque (“you, too”) 13. Poisoning the Well 14. Ad Hominem (“against the person”) 15. Appeal to Authority 16. Appeal to Fear Definition: Compares two or more things that are not in essence similar and suggests that since they share certain characteristics, they share others as well

  7. 1. Equivocation 2. Non Sequitur (“does not follow”) 3. Post Hoc, Ergo Propter Hoc (“after this, therefore because of this”) 4. Hasty Generalization 5. Slippery Slope 6. False Analogy 7. Straw Man 8. Special Pleading 9.Begging the Question 10. False Dichotomy/Dilemma 11. Red Herring 12. TuQuoque (“you, too”) 13. Poisoning the Well 14. Ad Hominem (“against the person”) 15. Appeal to Authority 16. Appeal to Fear Definition: Conclusion of argument is hidden amongst its assumptions—assumes that very question being argued has already been proven

  8. 1. Equivocation 2. Non Sequitur (“does not follow”) 3. Post Hoc, Ergo Propter Hoc (“after this, therefore because of this”) 4. Hasty Generalization 5. Slippery Slope 6. False Analogy 7. Straw Man 8. Special Pleading 9.Begging the Question 10. False Dichotomy/Dilemma 11. Red Herring 12. TuQuoque (“you, too”) 13. Poisoning the Well 14. Ad Hominem (“against the person”) 15. Appeal to Authority 16. Appeal to Fear Definition: Shift attention from the merits of the argument to the source or origin of the argument

  9. 1. Equivocation 2. Non Sequitur (“does not follow”) 3. Post Hoc, Ergo Propter Hoc (“after this, therefore because of this”) 4. Hasty Generalization 5. Slippery Slope 6. False Analogy 7. Straw Man 8. Special Pleading 9.Begging the Question 10. False Dichotomy/Dilemma 11. Red Herring 12. TuQuoque (“you, too”) 13. Poisoning the Well 14. Ad Hominem (“against the person”) 15. Appeal to Authority 16. Appeal to Fear Definition: Directly or implicitly threatening the audience

  10. 1. Equivocation 2. Non Sequitur (“does not follow”) 3. Post Hoc, Ergo Propter Hoc (“after this, therefore because of this”) 4. Hasty Generalization 5. Slippery Slope 6. False Analogy 7. Straw Man 8. Special Pleading 9.Begging the Question 10. False Dichotomy/Dilemma 11. Red Herring 12. TuQuoque (“you, too”) 13. Poisoning the Well 14. Ad Hominem (“against the person”) 15. Appeal to Authority 16. Appeal to Fear Definition: Attack a view similar to but not the same as the one your opponent holds, a diversionary tactic

  11. 1. Equivocation 2. Non Sequitur (“does not follow”) 3. Post Hoc, Ergo Propter Hoc (“after this, therefore because of this”) 4. Hasty Generalization 5. Slippery Slope 6. False Analogy 7. Straw Man 8. Special Pleading 9.Begging the Question 10. False Dichotomy/Dilemma 11. Red Herring 12. TuQuoque (“you, too”) 13. Poisoning the Well 14. Ad Hominem 15. Appeal to Authority 16. Appeal to Fear Definition: Judges and labels the same act differently depending on the person or group who performs the act

  12. 1. Equivocation 2. Non Sequitur (“does not follow”) 3. Post Hoc, Ergo Propter Hoc (“after this, therefore because of this”) 4. Hasty Generalization 5. Slippery Slope 6. False Analogy 7. Straw Man 8. Special Pleading 9.Begging the Question 10. False Dichotomy/Dilemma 11. Red Herring 12. TuQuoque (“you, too”) 13. Poisoning the Well 14. Ad Hominem (“against the person”) 15. Appeal to Authority 16. Appeal to Fear Definition: Contrary possibilities are wrongly presented as though they are exhaustive and exclusive—either/or reasoning

  13. 1. Equivocation 2. Non Sequitur (“does not follow”) 3. Post Hoc, Ergo Propter Hoc (“after this, therefore because of this”) 4. Hasty Generalization 5. Slippery Slope 6. False Analogy 7. Straw Man 8. Special Pleading 9.Begging the Question 10. False Dichotomy/Dilemma 11. Red Herring 12. TuQuoque (“you, too”) 13. Poisoning the Well 14. Ad Hominem (“against the person”) 15. Appeal to Authority 16. Appeal to Fear Definition: Irrelevant topic is presented in order to divert attention from the original issue

  14. 1. Equivocation 2. Non Sequitur (“does not follow”) 3. Post Hoc, Ergo Propter Hoc (“after this, therefore because of this”) 4. Hasty Generalization 5. Slippery Slope 6. False Analogy 7. Straw Man 8. Special Pleading 9.Begging the Question 10. False Dichotomy/Dilemma 11. Red Herring 12. TuQuoque (“you, too”) 13. Poisoning the Well 14. Ad Hominem (“against the person”) 15. Appeal to Authority 16. Appeal to Fear Definition: Discredits an argument because the behavior of the person proposing it does not conform to the position s/he’s holding

  15. 1. Equivocation 2. Non Sequitur (“does not follow”) 3. Post Hoc, Ergo Propter Hoc (“after this, therefore because of this”) 4. Hasty Generalization 5. Slippery Slope 6. False Analogy 7. Straw Man 8. Special Pleading 9.Begging the Question 10. False Dichotomy/Dilemma 11. Red Herring 12. TuQuoque (“you, too”) 13. Poisoning the Well 14. Ad Hominem (“against the person”) 15. Appeal to Authority 16. Appeal to Fear Definition: A simplistic and improbably prediction based on series of steps

  16. 1. Equivocation 2. Non Sequitur (“does not follow”) 3. Post Hoc, Ergo Propter Hoc (“after this, therefore because of this”) 4. Hasty Generalization 5. Slippery Slope 6. False Analogy 7. Straw Man 8. Special Pleading 9.Begging the Question 10. False Dichotomy/Dilemma 11. Red Herring 12. TuQuoque (“you, too”) 13. Poisoning the Well 14. Ad Hominem (“against the person”) 15. Appeal to Authority 16. Appeal to Fear Definition: Because one event follows another event, the first event must be the cause of the second—false cause

  17. 1. Equivocation 2. Non Sequitur (“does not follow”) 3. Post Hoc, Ergo Propter Hoc (“after this, therefore because of this”) 4. Hasty Generalization 5. Slippery Slope 6. False Analogy 7. Straw Man 8. Special Pleading 9.Begging the Question 10. False Dichotomy/Dilemma 11. Red Herring 12. TuQuoque (“you, too”) 13. Poisoning the Well 14. Ad Hominem (“against the person”) 15. Appeal to Authority 16. Appeal to Fear Definition: The claim (conclusion) does not follow the premises (reasons)—it is irrelevant

  18. Reminder: The difference between post hoc and non sequitur fallacies is that, whereas the post hoc fallacy is due to lack of causal connection, in the non sequitur fallacy, the error is due to lack of logical connection.

  19. Name the Fallacy: `“You say ‘Why do I think [America] is in danger?’ and I say look at the record. Seven years of the Truman-Acheson Administration and what’s happened? Six hundred million people lost to the Communists, and a war in Korea in which we have lost 117,000 American Casualties.” (From Nixon’s “Checkers” speech.

  20. Name the Fallacy: Since 9/11 we’ve tried and convicted few terrorists, therefore our defense system must be working.

  21. Name the Fallacy: He went to the movies on three consecutive nights, so he must love movies.

  22. Name that Fallacy: Sydney, I put aside all my other classes and worked really hard on this essay, so I should get an A.

  23. Name that Fallacy: “A group of self-appointed lifestyle police are pushing to control many aspects of our daily lives. If thy succeed, we lose out basic right of free choice. Today they’re targeting smoking. What’s next? Red meat? Leather? Coffee? If fifty million smokers can lose their rights anyone can.” (From an ad for the National Smokers Alliance.)

  24. Name that Fallacy America: Love it or Leave it.

  25. Name that Fallacy: You can’t expect insight and credibility from the recent book The Feminist Challenge because its author David Bouchier is, obviously, a man.

  26. Name that Fallacy: Politicians can’t be trusted because they lack integrity.

  27. Name that Fallacy: “Clearly, you must recognize that in this case I’m firm. You are stubborn. He’s pig-headed.” (Philosopher Betrand Russell.)

  28. Name that Fallacy: Anyone who truly cares about preserving the American way of life will vote Republican this fall.

  29. Name that Fallacy: “All Latinos are volatile people.” (Former Senator Jesse Helms, on Mexican protests against Senate Foreign Affairs subcommittee hearings on corruption south of the border.)

  30. Name that Fallacy: Bill: "I believe that abortion is morally acceptable. After all, a woman should have a right to her own body." 
Jane: "I disagree completely. Dr. Johan Skarn says that abortion is always morally wrong, regardless of the situation. He has to be right, after all, he is a respected expert in his field." 
Bill: "I've never heard of Dr. Skarn. Who is he?" 
Jane: "He's the guy that won the Nobel Prize in physics for his work on cold fusion." 
Bill: "I see. Does he have any expertise in morality or ethics?" 
Jane: "I don't know. But he's a world famous expert, so I believe him."

  31. Name that Fallacy: “You know, Professor Smith, I really need to get an A in this class. I'd like to stop by during your office hours later to discuss my grade. I'll be in your building anyway, visiting my father. He's your dean, by the way. I'll see you later."

  32. Name that Fallacy: “Sydney, if I do not get an A in this class I will not be able to achieve my goal of transferring to UCSD in the fall. On top of that, I may lose my good driver discount on car insurance and this class costs a lot of money!If this happens, I can’t say what my parents will do…” (At least one student every semester…)

  33. Name that Fallacy: “I give so much pleasure to so many people. Why can’t I get some pleasure for myself?” (Comedian John Belushi to his doctor in justification of drug use.)

  34. Name that Fallacy: “Just as instructors can prune sentences for poor grammar, so the principal was entitled to find certain articles inappropriate for publication—in this situation because they might reveal the identity of pregnant students and because references to sexual activity were deemed improper for high school students to see.”

  35. Name that Fallacy: “He cannot accuse me of libel because he was just successfully sued for libel.”

  36. Name that Fallacy: “Senator Jones says that we should not fund the attack submarine program. I disagree entirely. I can’t understand why he wants to leave us defenseless like that.

  37. Name that Fallacy: "We admit that this measure is popular. But we also urge you to note that there are so many bond issues on this ballot that the whole thing is getting ridiculous."

  38. Name that Fallacy:

More Related