Chapter 5

Logical Fallacies
(Part 1: Fallacies of Relevance)








• Personal Attack (Ad Hominem) • Bandwagon Argument
• Look Who is Talking (to QuoQue) • Straw Man
• Two wrongs make aright • Red Herring
• Scare Tactics • Equivocation
• Appeal to Pity • Begging the Question

A logical fallacy —or fallacy, for short—is an argument that contains a mistake in
reasoning.

Fallacies of Relevance Fallacies of Insufficient Evidence
Mistakes in reasoning that occur because the Mistakes in reasoning that occur because the
premises are logically irrelevant, or unrelated to the premises, though logically relevant to the conclusion,
conclusion. fail to provide sufficient evidence to support the
conclusion.

PART 1
FALLACY of RELEVANCE
(Arguments in which premises are logically irrelevant to the conclusion)

• A logical fallacy —or fallacy, for short—is an argument that contains a mistake in reasoning.

• To say that one statement is relevant to another is to say that it counts either for or against
that other statement.

• A statement is relevant to another statement if it provides at least some reason for thinking that
the second statement is true or false.

• There are three ways in which a statement can be relevant or irrelevant to another. A statement
can be:

1. Positively Relevant: A statement is positively relevant to another statement if it counts

in favor of that statement.
Ø Example: All dogs have five legs. Rover is a dog. So Rover has five legs.
2. Negatively Relevant: A statement is negatively relevant to another statement if it counts
against that statement.
Ø Example: Bunny is two years old. So, Bunny probably goes to college.

3. Logically Irrelevant: A statement is logically irrelevant to another statement if it counts

neither for nor against that statement.
Ø Example: The earth revolves around the sun. Therefore, marijuana should be
legalized.

• A fallacy of relevance occurs when an arguer offers reasons that are logically irrelevant to his
or her conclusion.

• The argument relies on premises that are not logically relevant to the conclusion. Such faulty
arguments cannot be valid because the premise is not relevant to the conclusion. Fallacies of
relevance often seem to be good arguments but aren’t.

FALLACIES OF RELEVANCE
Personal Attack (ad hominem) Look who is Talking (to QuoQue)
• Ad hominem is a Latin word that means “against the • Committed when an arguer rejects another person’s
man.” argument or claim because that person fails to practice
• We commit the fallacy of personal attack when we what he preaches. Also called “you too”, the “two
reject someone’s argument or claim by attacking the wrongs” or the “look who’s talking”. Pronunciation: tu-
person (character, personal traits, motive or other KWO-kway
attribute) rather than the person’s argument or claim. • Also known as: the two wrongs fallacy, the pot calling
• Argument with an emotional appeal, rather than logic. the kettle black.

Examples: Mother: You should stop smoking. It's harmful to your

1. “How can you argue your case for vegetarianism when you health.
are enjoying that steak?” Daughter: Why should I listen to you?
2. A: “All murderers are criminals, but a thief isn’t a murderer, You started smoking when you were 16!
and so can’t be a criminal.”
B: “Well, you’re a thief and a criminal, so there goes your • The logical pattern of these arguments is this:
argument.” 1. X fails to follow his or her own advice.
2. Therefore, X’s claim or argument should be rejected.
• Arguments are good or bad not because of who offers
them but because of their own intrinsic strengths or
weaknesses.

Two Wrongs Make a Right Scare Tactics (Appeal to Fear)

• Uses an illogical reasoning pattern to make an • Committed when an arguer threatens harm to a reader
argument or claim. or listener if he or she does not accept the arguer’s
• Two wrongs make a right occurs when someone argues conclusion and this threat is irrelevant to the truth of the
that a course of action is justified because the other arguer’s conclusion.
person has done the same or would do the same if given • Logical Form
a chance. If you do not accept X as true,
something terrible will happen to you. Therefore, X
1. I don’t feel guilty about cheating on Dr. Boyer’s test. Half must be true
the class cheats on his tests.
2. Why pick on me, officer? Nobody comes to a complete stop
at that stop sign.
Examples:
3. Marge: Bart, quit hitting your sister. Diplomat to diplomat: I’m sure you’ll agree that we are the
Bart: Well, she pinched me. rightful rulers of the Borneo Island. It would be regrettable if we
4. Linda made fun of Lily's shoes yesterday. Today, Lily makes had to send armed forces to demonstrate the validity of our claim.
fun of Linda's haircut and tells her teacher that it should be
okay because of what Linda did yesterday. • No relevant evidence that supports the stated
5. A clerk who steals money from her company justifies her conclusion.
actions by saying that the company has been overcharging • Any kind of threat can be involved (physical or non-
customers for years. physical).
• NOT all threats involve fallacies.
• Of course, there are times when an act that would
otherwise be wrong can be justified by citing the
wrongful actions of others.

Here are two examples: Examples:

Police officer: Why did you spray this man with pepper spray? Parent to teen: If you come home late one more time, your
You: Because he attacked me with a knife. I did it in self-defense. allowance will be cut.

Father: Why did you go swimming when the pool was closed?
Son: Because my friend Joe jumped in and was drowning. I did
it to save his life.
• These are clear cases where the justifications offered
do, in fact, serve to justify what would otherwise be
wrongful behavior.
President John Kennedy to Soviet Premier Nikita Krushchev:
If you don’t remove your nuclear missiles from Cuba, we will
have no choice but to remove them by force. If we use force to
remove the missiles, that may provoke an all-out nuclear war.
Neither of us wants a nuclear war. Therefore, you should remove
your missiles from Cuba. (paraphrased).
• The first example is not a fallacy because it is simply a
statement, not an argument.
• The second example is not a fallacy because the
premises are logically relevant to the conclusion.

Appeal to Pity Bandwagon Argument
• Occurs when an arguer inappropriately attempts to • One that plays on a person’s desire to be popular,
evoke feelings of pity or compassion from his listeners accepted, or valued, rather than appealing to logically
or readers relevant reasons or evidence

Examples:
Student to professor: I know I missed half your classes and failed
all my exams, but I had a really tough semester. First my pet boa
constrictor died. Then my girlfriend told me she wants a sex-
change operation. With all I went through this semester, I don’t
think I really deserved an F. Any chance you might cut me some
slack and change my grade to a C or a D?
• When you did not finish an assignment on time, you tell
your teacher about how your printer was out of ink, but
that you didn't want to ask your mom to go to the store
because she works nights, doesn't get much sleep, and
she was sleeping.
• The arguments are clearly fallacious because the
premises provide no relevant reasons to accept the
conclusions.
• In the examples, the appeals to emotion are both
appropriate and relevant to the arguers’ legitimate
purposes.
• Too often, however, people use emotional appeals to
hinder or obscure rational thinking. When emotional
appeals are used in this way, the appeals are fallacious.
Examples:
1. All the really cool students at Kolej IGS smoke
cigarettes. Therefore, you should, too.
2. I can’t believe you’re going to the library on a Friday
night! You don’t want people to think that you do not
have a life, do you?
The basic pattern of these arguments is this:
1. Everybody (or a select group of people) believes or does
X.
2. Therefore, you should believe or do X, too.
Fallacious because the fact that a belief or practice is
popular usually provides little or no evidence that the belief
is true.
• Not all appeals to popular beliefs or practices are
fallacious, however, as these examples illustrate:
1. All the villagers I’ve talked to say that the water is safe
to drink. Therefore, the water probably is safe to drink.
2. A lot of my friends recommend the Thien Thien Chicken
Rice, so it’s probably a good place to eat.
• These bandwagon appeals are not fallacious because
the premises are relevant to the conclusions.

Straw Man Red Herring

• Committed when an arguer distorts an opponent’s • Committed when an arguer tries to sidetrack his
argument or claim to make it easier to attack. audience by raising an irrelevant issue and then claims
• Occurs when someone argues that a person holds a that the original issue has effectively been settled by the
view that is actually not what the other person believes. irrelevant diversion.
• Instead, it is a distorted version of what the person • With red herring, the person simply changes the subject
believes. to direct attention away from the original argument.
• Referring to information irrelevant in an attempt to
So, instead of attacking the person's actual statement or confuse or manipulate the issue.
belief, it is the distorted version that is attacked.
Examples:
Examples: 1. A student gets into trouble for not meeting the dress code at
1. Landon says that he thinks his friends should not be so rude her school. When her teacher confronts her, she begins
to the new girl. (actual statement or belief) talking about how the dress code is a punishment for girls
and boys are able to wear whatever they want.
2. Mike says that he cannot believe that Landon is choosing to 2. The discipline teacher begins to question Ali Baba about the
be better friends with the new girl than the guys who have fight that he was just involved in, and Ali Baba begins to talk
always known him. (distorted statement or belief) about how he has been bullied at school repeatedly and
nothing has been done.

Equivocation Begging the Question

• An argument that uses one word to mean two different
things. A fallacy depending on the double meaning of
the word.
• Committed when a key word is used in two or more
senses in the same argument and the apparent success
of the argument depends on the shift in meaning
• Equivocation, the fallacy of focus, is using a term in
two or more ways during reasoning. Commonly seen in
media, politics, literature and more.
• Examples:
Examples:
1. Feathers are light. Light is bright. Therefore, feathers are
bright.
2. At first, "light" is used as the opposite of "heavy," but later
as a synonym of "bright."
Feathers are "light," but they are not "bright." The meaning
of the term "light" has been switched during reasoning, thus
making it equivocation.
• Fallacies of equivocation can be difficult to spot
because they often appear valid, but they aren’t.
• Committed when an arguer states or assumes as a
premise the very thing he or she is trying to prove as a
conclusion.
• Any form of argument where conclusion is assumed in
one of the premises.
• There are two common ways to commit this fallacy.
[No 1] The most obvious way is to simply restate the
conclusion in slightly different words.
1. Bungee-jumping is dangerous because it’s unsafe.
2. Capital punishment is morally wrong because it is ethically
impermissible to inflict death as punishment for a crime.
3. Paranormal activity is real because I have experienced what
can only be described as paranormal activity.
[No 2] “circular reasoning” or “arguing in a circle.”
Chicken and egg, circular reasoning (the proposition is supported
by the premises, which is supported by the proposition, creating
a circle in reasoning where no useful information is being shared.
Example:
Fruits and vegetables are part of a healthy diet.
After all, a healthy eating plan includes fruits and vegetables.

Note the tight circle of reasoning here: A because B, B because

A.