Fallacies

Flaws in the Structure of an

Argument

What are fallacies?

Fallacies

are defects in an argument.

Fallacies cause an argument to be
invalid, unsound, or weak.
Fallacies can be separated into two
general groups: formal and informal.

Formal Fallacies

Formal fallacies are only found in deductive

arguments.

Deductive arguments are supposed to be airtight.

For a deductive argument to be valid, it must be

absolutely impossible for both its premises to be
true and its conclusion to be false. With a good
deductive argument, that simply cannot happen;
the truth of the premises entails the truth of the
conclusion.

Formal Fallacies

The classic example of a deductively valid

argument is:

1.
2.
3.

All men are mortal. (premise)

Socrates is a man. (premise)
Therefore Socrates is mortal. (guaranteed conclusion)

It is simply not possible that both (1) and

(2) are true and (3) is false, so this
argument is deductively valid.

Formal Fallacies

Any deductive argument that fails to meet this

very high standard commits a logical error, and
so, technically, is fallacious.

This includes many arguments that we would

usually accept as good arguments, arguments
that make their conclusions highly probable but
not certain.

Arguments that arent deductively valid are said

to commit a formal fallacy.

Formal Fallacies

Example of a deductive argument with a formal

fallacy:
1.
2.
3.

All humans are mammals. (premise)

All cats are mammals. (premise)
All humans are cats. (conclusion)

Both premises in this argument are true but the

conclusion is false. The defect is a formal fallacy
and can be demonstrated by reducing the
argument to its bare structure:
1. All A are C
2. All B are C
3. All A are B

Formal Fallacies
With

deductive arguments, it can be

helpful to reduce an argument to its
structure.

All chickens are feathered animals. (premise)

Clucko is a chicken. (premise)
Therefore Clucko is a feathered animal.
(guaranteed conclusion)

Formal Fallacies

All chickens are feathered animals. (premise)

Quacko is a feathered animal. (premise)
Therefore Quacko is a chicken. (nonguaranteed conclusion)

This argument commits a formal fallacy in

that its form doesnt guarantee the truth
of its conclusion, even if the initial
premises are true.

Informal Fallacies

They are flaws in the structure of an

argument.
They are embedded in many everyday
arguments.
They sometimes make fallacious reasoning
seem deceptively persuasive
They can be found in deductive and
inductive arguments

Informal Fallacies: Three

Categories
A. Fallacies of Pathos
B. Fallacies of Ethos
C. Fallacies of Logos

A. Fallacies of Pathos

Rest on flaws in the way an argument

appeals to the audiences emotions and
values

1. Argument to the People

2. Appeal to Ignorance
3. Appeal to Popularity
4. Appeal to Pity
5. Red Herring

1. Argument to the People

Appeal to Stirring Symbols

Appeal to the fundamental beliefs, biases,

and prejudices of the audience in order to
sway opinion through a feeling of solidarity
among those of a group.

Argument to the People

Appeal to Stirring Symbols

The stirring symbol of the American flag

Allegiance to nationalistic values
Solidarity of American citizens

Ex: Joe Politician delivering a speech while wearing

a suit made out material patterned with the
American flag.

Ex: Marilyn Manson wiping his butt on an American

flag.

2. Appeal to Ignorance

Presenting assumptions, assertions, or

evidence that the audience is incapable of
examining or judging.

Maintaining that because a claim has not

been disproved, it must be true.

Appeal to Ignorance

Ex: Researchers have not conclusively shown

that there is no monster at the bottom of Loch
Ness; therefore, we should expect to see the
monster at any time.

Ex: There must be intelligent life on other

planets. No one has proven that there isnt.

Appeal to Ignorance

Ex: Genetically modified organisms must be

dangerous to our health because science has not
proved that they are safe.

Ex: Jones must have used steroids to get those

bulging muscles because he cannot prove that he
has not used steroids.

3. Appeal to Popularity
The Bandwagon Appeal

The argument rests on the assertion that since

everybody else is doing something, you should do
it too.
These appeals are fallacious because the
popularity of something is irrelevant to its actual
merits.
These appeals are common in advertising where
the claim that a product is popular substitutes for
evidence of the products excellence.

Appeal to Popularity
The Bandwagon Appeal

Ex: All the popular, cool kids have tattoos;

therefore, I should get a tattoo.

Ex: Everybody who has a Facebook page has a

lot of friends; therefore, I should make a Facebook
page.

4. Appeal to Pity

The arguer appeals to the audiences

sympathetic feelings in order to support a
claim that should be decided on more
relevant or objective grounds.

Appeal to Pity

Ex: Professor Rose, Im sorry I couldnt finish my

essay. You dont understand how difficult my life
is right now. My parents could not afford to send
me to college, and I have to work two part-time
jobs to pay for my classes and books.

Appeal to Pity

Ex: Honorable Judge, I should not be fined $250

for driving 85 mph in a 25 mph zone because I
was distraught from hearing the news of my
brothers illness and was rushing to see him in
the hospital.

5. Red Herring

Refers to the practice of throwing an

audience off track by raising an unrelated
or irrelevant point.

The name derives from the practice of using a red

herring (a very smelly fish) to throw dogs off from
a scent that they are supposed to be tracking.

Red Herring

Ex: Jacks girlfriend asks, Where were you last

night? Jack answers, I sure am glad to see you.
You look extra beautiful today!

Ex: Question to politician, Whats your stand on

gun control? Politicians reply, Im for family
values.

Red Herring

Ex: I dont believe we should elect this

candidate because she would have to put
her children in daycare.

B. Fallacies of Ethos

Fallacies of Ethos = Rest on a flawed

relationship between the argument and
the character of those involved in the
argument.

Often these fallacies attack character or

use character instead of evidence for
proof.

1. Appeal to False Authority

The arguer appeals to the authority of a popular

person rather than a knowledgeable one.

Many advertisements are based on this fallacy.

Testimony to support an argument should come

from a person competent in the field.

Appeal to False Authority

Kobe Bryant says that Wheaties cereal keeps him

on his game; therefore, Wheaties cereal is a good
cereal.

Real evidence about the quality of Wheaties

cereal would include specific information about its
nutritional content rather than testimony from a
hired athlete.

Appeal to False Authority

My favorite actor, who appeared in a movie about

AIDS, has testified that the HIV virus doesnt really
cause AIDS and that there has been a cover-up. So, I
think that AIDS must be caused by something other
than HIV, and the drug companies are hiding it so
that they can make money from expensive anti-HIV
drugs.

The above argument bases its conclusion on the

testimony of an actor, apparently because he
appeared in a movie on the topic. Legitimate
testimony on the nature of AIDS would have to
come from doctors or scientists.

Appeal to False Authority

Tom Cruise says that postpartum depression can

be best treated with vitamins because antidepressant drugs are dangerous. Therefore, all
women who claim they have postpartum
depression should stop taking anti-depressants
and start taking vitamins.

2. Ad Hominem
Appeal to the person

Arguments

that attack the character of

the arguer rather than the argument
itself
Name-calling (referring to a disputant by unsavory
names)
Appeal to prejudice (applying ethnic, racial,
gender, or religious slurs to an opponent)
Guilt by association (linking the opposition to
extremely unpopular groups or causes)
Poisoning the Well (discrediting an opponent or an
opposing view in advance)

Ad Hominem
Appeal to the person

Name-calling
Ex: OJ Simpson claims that he is innocent, but
hes a wife beater.
Ex: Hugh Hefner, founder of Playboy
magazine, has argued against the censorship
of pornography. But Hefner is an immature,
self-indulgent millionaire who never outgrew
the adolescent fantasies of his youth. His
argument is worthless.
Ex: All wars are not wrong. The people who
say so are cowards.

Ad Hominem
Appeal to the person

Appeal

to prejudice

Ex: Because he is extremely wealthy, our

mayor cannot properly represent this city.
Ex: I reject what Father Rolly has to say about
the ethical issues of abortion because he is a
Catholic priest. After all, Father Rolly is required
to hold such views.

Ad Hominem
Appeal to the person

Guilt

by Association

Ex: Of course you support medical marijuana.

All of your friends are a bunch of pot-head
hippies.

Ex: Professor Smith has argued against the

theory of evolution. But hes a member of the
Communist Bikers Association. I refuse to
listen to him!

Ad Hominem
Appeal to the person

Poisoning

the Well

Ex: You are told, prior to meeting him, that your

friends boyfriend is a poseur and a mooch. When
you meet him, everything you hear him say is
tainted.

Ex: Before I leave the floor to the next speaker, I

must remind you that persons who oppose my plan
do not have the best interests of the working people
in their hearts.

3. Straw Man

Greatly oversimplifying an opponents

argument in order to make it easier to
refute or ridicule
Diverts attention from the real issue
The name comes from the practice of stuffing dummies and
scarecrows with straw. When one attacks an opponent by
putting words into the opponents mouth, one makes up a
dummy position. But just as beating up a scarecrow
doesnt demonstrate any athletic accomplishment, beating
up a straw man in an argument doesnt demonstrate
anything.

Straw Man

Ex: You many think that levying confiscatory

taxes on homeless peoples cardboard dwellings
is the surest way out of a recession, but I dont.

Ex: While my opponent would like to empty our

prisons of serial killers, I hold to the sacred
principles of compensatory justice.

C. Fallacies of Logos
Rest

on flaws in the relationship

among statements in an argument

1. Hasty Generalization

Making a broad generalization on the basis

of too little evidence

Traditionally, faulty generalizations have

been labeled either hasty or
unrepresentative.

Hasty Generalization

Ex: Yesterday I met the most remarkable person.

He is kind, considerate, sensitive, and thoughtful.

Ex: I talked to five people in my neighborhood,

and all of them said they had guns. The whole
city must be armed.

Hasty Generalization

Ex: My cousin is a college student, and he

doesnt care the least bit about politics. Students
these days are terribly apathetic.

Ex: Jean writes poetry, and shes very sensitive

and frequently depressed. People who write
poetry are sensitive and prone to depression.

2. Post Hoc, Ergo Propter

Hoc
After This, Therefore Because of This

Occurs when a sequential relationship is

mistaken for a causal relationship
Confusing correlation for cause
Ex: Event A occurred before Event B;
therefore, Event A must have caused
Event B.

Post Hoc, Ergo Propter Hoc

After This, Therefore Because of This

Ex: Governor X took office in 2008. In

2009, the state suffered a severe
recession. Therefore, Governor X should
not be re-elected.

Ex: Cramming for a test really helps. Last

week I crammed for a psychology test, and
I got an A on it.

Post Hoc, Ergo Propter Hoc

After This, Therefore Because of This

Superstition is often based on this fallacy.

Ex: Since I walked under that ladder yesterday,

Ive lost my wallet and received a speeding ticket.

Ex: Everything was going fine until the lunar

eclipse last month; thats why the economy is in
trouble.

3. Begging the Question

Circular Reasoning

Supporting

a claim with a reason that

simply restates the claim in different
words
Ex: Bungee-jumping is dangerous because its
unsafe.
Ex: Women should not be permitted to join
mens clubs because the clubs are for men
only.

Begging the Question

Circular Reasoning

Ex: Abortion is murder because it is the

intentional taking of the life of a human
being.

Because murder is defined as the intentional

taking of the life of a human being, the
argument is circular.

4. False Dilemma Either/Or

Oversimplifying a complex issue so that only two

choices appear possible
No alternative, middle-ground, or compromise
positions are acknowledged.
Often one of the choices is made to seem
unacceptable , so the only remaining option is the
other choice.
Ex: Its my way or the highway.

False Dilemma Either/Or

Ex: Love football or youre not a man.

Ex: A woman can either be a mother or

have a career.

Ex: Either we get tough with drug users,

or we legalize all drugs.

False Dilemma Either/Or

Ex: Either we allow embryonic stem cell

research, or we condemn persons with
diabetes, Parkinsons disease, or spinal
injuries to a life without a cure.

5. Slippery Slope

Based on the fear that once we put a foot

on a slippery slope heading in the wrong
direction, we will have to keep going.
The controlling metaphor is of a slick
mountainside without places to hold on
rather than of a staircase with numerous
stopping places.
Often functions as a scare tactic

Slippery Slope

Ex: Look, Joe, no one feels worse about

your need for open-heart surgery than I
do. But I still cannot let you turn this
essay in late. If I were to let you do it,
then I would have to let everyone turn
essays in late.

Slippery Slope

Ex: We dont dare legalize marijuana. If

we do, well have to legalize cocaine, then
ecstasy, and then heroin. Finally, all hard
hard drugs will be available anywhere to
anybody.

6. False Analogy

Arguments by analogy use a comparison

as though it were evidence to support a
claim.

An argument by analogy is only as strong

as the comparison on which it rests. The
false analogy fallacy is committed when
the comparison is not strong enough.

False Analogy

Ex: There is no convincing evidence to

show that cigarette smoking is harmful.
Too much of anything is harmful. Too
much Jell-O is harmful.

False Analogy
Ex:

Mountain climber talking to his

mother, I dont want to die falling off
a rock. But you can kill yourself
falling in the bathtub, too.

7. Non Sequitur
It Does Not Follow

Making a claim that does not follow

logically from the premises or is supported
by irrelevant premises.
The arguer seems to make an inexplicably
illogical leap.
There is a disconnect between the reasons
and the claim.

Non Sequitur
It Does Not Follow

Ex:

Violent video games have some

social value because the Army uses
them for recruiting.

There may be an important idea emerging

here, but too many logical steps are
missing.

Non Sequitur
It Does Not Follow

Ex: Our university has one of the best

faculties in the U.S. because a Nobel Prize
winner used to teach here.

How does the fact that a Nobel Prize winner used

to teach at our university make its present faculty
one of the best in the U.S.?

Non Sequitur
It Does Not Follow

Ex: Its a beautiful day! We dont need to

be in class.

Ex: The professor in the Hawaiian shirt

and flip flops must be an easy grader.