Fallacies

Lesson 4
 ▪ You may now have a great appreciation of the
your capabilities as a human being.
▪ However, we must be careful in crossing the line
to being too proud.
▪ Although the human mind is extraordinary, it
also has its limitations.
▪ After all, we are not omniscient.
INTRODUCTION ▪ In this lesson, we are to discuss the possible
errors that we can commit with our reasoning,
so we can be conscious of and avoid them as
much as we can.
▪ It is also a reminder that, sometimes, we can
commit mistakes. But our fallibility, too, is
natural.
 What errors can
the human mind
commit?
 ▪ Upon further studies of Logic, one would realize
that proper and strict valid reasoning employs
rules.
▪ Even if we rely on the rules and follow them as
much as we could, they only govern the structure
of an argument.
LOGIC ▪ We may have an argument that is in conformity
with the rules, but may not be in conformity
with reality.
▪ In other words, it is possible for us to have
correct but untrue arguments.
 ▪ This means we have to check not only
the structure and the rules, but we
also have to check the content and
truthfulness of our arguments.

REMINDER:
▪ In terms of errors, we can commit
them against both in the structure
and the content.
 ▪In Logic, errors or mistakes in
reasoning are called fallacies.
▪ The term came from the Latin word faller which
means ‘deception’ or ‘false’. Hence, fallacies are
false reasoning.
▪ One important note to think about is that if a reasoning
FALLACIES or argument committed a fallacy, it does not
necessarily mean that its conclusion is already false,
the fallacies are committed in the reasoning
process itself.
▪ It usually follows that if the reasoning is false, then the
conclusion is also false. However, that is not always the
case.
 ▪ In this example, the structure and form of the argument is
correct
▪ However, in terms of content, it may be fallacious.
▪ The first line, “Everything natural is good for the body.”, is false
Everything natural is
because if something is natural, it does not necessarily mean
good for the body. that it is already good for the body.
Vegetable are natural.
Therefore, vegetables ▪ Hemlock is a plant, which means it is natural. However, it is
actually poison.
are good for the body
▪ So, this argument already committed a fallacy on its first line.
Even so, it is still possible for the conclusion

▪ (Therefore, vegetables are good for the body.) to be correct.

 ▪ There are hundreds, maybe even
thousands of fallacies out there.

FALLACIES ARE ALSO ▪ But, the generally-accepted ones

REFERRED TO AS are classified into three(3):
ARGUMENTS THAT
APPEARS TO BE ▪ Irrelevance
CORRECT ▪ Presumption and
▪ Ambiguity
 ▪ are committed when the conclusion does
not have a connection or a ‘relevance’ to
the premises of the argument.
▪ The claims of the conclusion are not
appropriately supported by the premises
Fallacies of
Irrelevance ▪ Examples of these fallacies are :
▪ Argumentum ad Hominem, Argumentum ad
Baculum, Argumentum ad Ignorantiam,
Argumentum ad Misericordiam, and Tu Quoque
Fallacy.
 ▪ Are committed when our arguments make a jump to a
certain conclusion even without a strong evidence.
▪ As we know, the human mind has its limitations. We
do not possess knowledge about the things that had
happened before we were born, and we have no idea
what will happen in the future.
▪ We, sometimes, make presumptions in order to
organize the affairs in our lives, but there is a tendency
Fallacies of for us to overdo it.
Presumption ▪ We commit the Fallacies of Presumption when we
speak with certainty, even if we have no proof of it.
▪ Fallacies that fall under this classification are
Fallacy of Composition/Division, Fallacy of
Complex Question, Slippery Slope Fallacy,
False Cause Fallacy.
 ▪ fallacies that we commit due to our limitations in
language
▪ The 20th philosopher Ludwig Wittgenstein knew
this limitations in language, and thought in his
concept of Logical Atomism that it is the task of
philosophy to rectify the mistakes we commit
due to the limitations of our language

Fallacies of ▪ can also be called as Fallacies of Language

Ambiguity ▪ The way we convey our ideas into language could, sometimes, result
in ambiguous and vague statements that are open to interpretation,

▪ and so we could proceed to a misunderstanding with the person we

are communicating with.
▪ Fallacies that fall under this classification are
▪ Fallacies of Equivocation, Fallacies of Amphiboly, Fallacies of
Accent
Fallacies Example
Lesson 5
Fallacies Of Irrelevance
 ▪ Is a Latin phrase that translates to “an
argument to the man” or “an attack to
the man”.
▪ In an argument, what we should address
Argumentum is the argument itself.

ad Hominem ▪ Argumentum ad Hominem consists of an

attack to the person who is speaking
the argument rather than to the
argument itself.
 ▪ Person A: Logic is an extremely important and
useful subject.
▪ Person B: You believe that because you're an idiot
and you need logic.
▪ Person B, instead of providing a reason why he
thinks Person A is wrong, resorted to an attack to
the character of Person A through an insult.
EXAMPLE ▪ "People like you don't understand what it's like to
grow up black in America. You have no right to
argue about the gang violence on our streets.“
▪ Attacking a defendant’s character by pointing out
their flaws in a case - “You cheated and lied to
your wife, but you expect the jury to believe you
now?
 ▪ translates to “an appeal to the stick”.
▪ The stick is used as an instrument to
punish a child in order to force him to
Argumentum behave in ways his parents want him to.
ad Baculum Hence, this fallacy appeals to force or
authority – whether physical or
economical
 ▪ Richard: Anna, you have to tell the board that my proposal
is the best one. Else, I will fire you.
▪ Note here that Richard is forcing Anna to do as he wishes
and threatens her as an appeal to punishment.

▪ Chairman of the Board: “All those opposed to my

arguments for the opening of a new department,
EXAMPLE
signify by saying, ‘I resign.’”
 ▪“an appeal to ignorance” is
a fallacy being used to
Argumentum argue the non-existence of
ad Ignorantiam
something due to a lack of
knowledge
 ▪ Richard: I did not see Anna’s e-mail in my inbox.
Therefore, she did not send it.
▪ In this example, Richard equates his not seeing Anna’s
e-mail to a conclusion that she did not

▪ send it. Although it is possible that it went to a different

folder in his e-mail and a number of other possibilities.

EXAMPLE ▪ You can't prove that there aren't Martians living in caves
under the surface of Mars, so it is reasonable for me to
believe there are.
▪ No one can actually prove that God exists; therefore
God does not exist.
 ▪“an appeal to misery”.
This is usually in a form of
Argumentum ad verbal and/or physical
Misericordiam crying. It appeals to one’s
emotion so the person will
be convinced
 ▪ Person A: You can't have a cigarette now. The hospital has a
rule against smoking when you're in an oxygen tent.
▪ Person B: You've just got to let me have one. You can't believe
what those doctors have done to me. My life the last three
days has been a living nightmare.

▪ "You should not find the defendant

guilty of murder, since it would
EXAMPLE break his poor mother's heart to
see him sent to jail.“
 ▪“an appeal to hypocrisy”
is a fallacy we commit by
Tu Quoque justifying our wrong actions
Fallacy
because somebody has
done it as well
 ▪ Person A: You can’t cut classes today, we have a big exam later.
▪ Person B: Oh come on, you’ve no right to lecture me, you have also cut
classes last week.
▪ In this example, Person B seems to be appealing to Person’s A hypocrisy
that he cannot give him a lecture to do the right action.

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

EXAMPLE Daughter: Why should I listen to you? You started smoking

when you were 16!
▪ Helga: You should not be eating that... it has been
scientifically proven that eating fat burgers are no good for
your health.
Hugh: You eat fat burgers all the time so that can’t be true.
Fallacies Of
Presumption
 ▪ is about the relation between parts and
whole
▪ Fallacy of Composition-happens when we
mistakenly assume that what is true for the
parts must also be true for the whole

Fallacies of
Composition/ ▪ Fallacy of Division , it is the
Division other way around – we
mistakenly assume that what is
true for the whole must also be
Fallacy of Division
 ▪ Fallacy of Composition:
▪ The dog’s tail is brown, his eyes are
brown, his ears are brown. So, the
dog is brown.

EXAMPLE
▪ Fallacy of Division:
▪ The dog is white. So, his tail is
white, his eyes are white, his
paws are white.
 ▪ Fallacy of Composition:
▪ If you stand up at a concert, you can
usually see better. You may then directly
infer that if everyone stands up, everyone
can see better.

EXAMPLE ▪ Fallacy of Division

▪ The second grade in Jefferson elementary
eats a lot of ice cream. Carlos is a second-
grader in Jefferson elementary.
 ▪ Happens when we raise a
major questions that has
Fallacy of implicit minor questions. And
Complex when the major question is
Question answer, the implied questions
is also answered.
 ▪ Person A: Richard, how many bottles of rum did
you finish last night?
▪ Person A’s question assumes that Richard drank
last night, and that his drink was rum.
▪ Have you stopped beating your
EXAMPLE wife?
▪ Are you still a heavy drinker?
 ▪ consists of a sequence of
claims that will cause another
Slippery event which will cause another
event and so on.
Slope Fallacy
▪ It is also known as a “domino
theory”.
 ▪ I had a flat tire, I won’t be able to get to work,
which would lead for me to have a sanction,
which is bad in my records. Hence, I won’t be
able to get promotion due to a flat tire.

▪ legalizing prostitution is
undesirable because it would cause
EXAMPLE more marriages to break up, which
would in turn cause the breakdown
of the family, which would finally
result in the destruction of
civilization.
 ▪ is committed when two
following events occur and we
False Cause jump to the conclusion that the
Fallacy first event caused the second
event although no connection
between them can be found
 ▪ Event 1: Richard enters Anna’s hospital
room to visit her.
▪ Event 2: Anna gets a migraine.
▪ Person A: You shouldn’t have visited her,
Richard, you’re the cause of her
EXAMPLE migraines.
▪ Person A here committed False Cause
Fallacy because he does not have an
evidence of his claim that Richard,
indeed, caused Anna’s migraine
 ▪Every day, I eat cereal for
breakfast. One time, I had a
muffin instead, and there
EXAMPLE was a major earthquake in
my city. I've eaten cereal
ever since.
Fallacies Of Ambuguity
 ▪happens when we use a
single term with two or
Fallacy of more meanings (an
Equivocation equivocal term) in our
argument, and end up in a
confusing manner
 ▪ A ruler has 12 inches. G.M.A is a ruler. Hence,
G.M.A has 12 inches.
▪ In this example, the term ruler connotes as
both a measuring instrument and a leader.
▪ It is true that Puff Daddy is a star.

EXAMPLE ▪ A giant ball of gas is a star.

However, Puff Daddy is not a giant ball of gas.
 ▪on the other hand,
happens when our whole
Fallacy of sentence, instead of just
Amphiboly
a term, has two or more
meanings
 ▪ The ancient Greek king Croesus wanted to attack the
Persian empire. Before he did,
▪ he sent for the Oracle to get an advice. The Oracle said, “If
Croesus goes to war, he will destroy an empire.” With this
advice, Croesus went to war and lost.
▪ The Oracle’s statement committed the Fallacy of Amphiboly
EXAMPLE because it was open for at least two interpretations. The
first is that Croesus would win and destroy the Persian
empire,
▪ And the second is that Croesus would lose and destroy his
own empire
 ▪is committed when our
statements differs on
Fallacy of meaning once we put
Accent
emphasis on certain
words.
 ▪ I did not pass the exam last year.
▪ If you put the accent or emphasis on
the word pass ,
▪ this means he did something else
EXAMPLE with the exam.
▪ If you put the accent or emphasis
on the word exam , this means he
may have passed a different exam
passed it on a different time or year.