Fallacies

1. Fallacies

2. This is also known as a fallacy of distraction. It is an illegitimate use of the if-then scenario. A belief or proposal becomes unsatisfactory by adding an increasing number of outcomes that might never occur. • Example: Never gamble. You will become addicted. You will spend all your money and time gambling. You will lose your job and have to turn to crime to support your habit. • The way to counter this fallacy is to show the false certainty between the first proposal and all the outcomes that follow. Slippery Slope

3. This involves attacking the person offering the idea, rather than the idea itself. Ad Hominem is a commonly employed technique when emotions raise the temperature of a debate about a controversial issue. A person’s character, race age, or religion becomes targets for attack. • Example: Of course you think that movie was good. All teenagers have terrible judgment. • The way to counter this approach is to stop the discussion and point out how personal the attack has become. Withdrawing from the debate may be necessary. Ad Hominem

4. This fallacy involves citing a false authority. The individual either cites someone who is not an expert or gives the false impression that all experts in the field agree. • Example: Simon and Sasha are having a conversation: Sasha: "I played the lottery today and I know I am going to win something." Simon "What did you do, rig the outcome?" Sasha: "No, silly. I called my Super Psychic Buddy at the 1-900-MindPower number. After consulting his magic Californian Tarot deck, he told me my lucky numbers." Simon: "And you believed him?" Sasha: "Certainly, he is a certified Californian Master-Mind Psychic. That is why I believe what he has to say. I mean, like, who else would know what my lucky numbers are?" • To counter this fallacy, you either challenge the credentials of the expert or show there is disagreement in the field. Appeal to Authority

5. (Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc) “After this, therefore caused by this”. • Example: In 1928, Herbert Hoover assumed the office of President. In 1929, the Great Depression started. Hoover was responsible for the Depression. • To counter this faulty connection, you must prove the second event would have happened even if the first one did not. Post Hoc Fallacy

6. This fallacy is the violation of the Principle of Total Evidence, which requires introducing all relevant information into the discussion. The information left out would serve to undermine the speaker’s position. • Example: Ross Perot is over 60 years old. Most people over 60 years old make less than $45,000/year therefore Ross Perot probably makes less than $45,000/year. (This ignores the fact that he owns billions of dollars worth of stock and other profit-making property.) • To counter this, you must introduce the missing information. Fallacy of Exclusion

7. in this case, the truth of the conclusion is assumed in the premises. • Example: Since I am not lying, it follows that I must be telling the truth. • To counter this, you must argue that we can only accept the premises as true if we have agreed before hand that the conclusion s true. Begging the Question