INolTAg Y PAPER1 Aailfer FALLACIES ‘As we have seen in previous sections, one important feature of an argument is whether it is valid or not (in the case of deductive arguments), ot if it’s strong or weak Gin the case of inductive and arguments). The important mistakes that can be made within arguments, such, mistakes are called fallacies. Fallacies are errors or tricks of reasoning. It is defect in argument which misteads the mind. It can be intentional and unintentional. Unintentional fallacies are the errors. The intentional fallacies ae tricks and sometimes the intentional fallacies are called sophiam. Fallacies can be checked by testing if the arguments appeal to cthos (Ethics). logos (logic), pathos (emotion), Fallacies can be categorized as, Formal and informal fallacies Appeal to Probability Masked Man Fallacy Non Sequitur Bad Reason Fallacy Fallacies of Presumption Fallacies of Ambiguity Fallacies of Relevance TYPES OF FORMAL FALLACIES 1. Appeal to Probability This is a statement that takes something for granted because it is probable or possible, E.g: I see a dark cloud on the horizon. Dark clouds mean rain. Ifs going to rain here today.2 Masked Man Fallacy ‘Also known as the Intentional Fallacy it involves a substitution of parties. If the two things that are interchanged are identical, then the argument is assumed to be valid. Eg: [saw you having coffee with a man having beard. Rajesh have beard. So he is your new boy friend 3. Non Sequitur A fallacy wherein someone asserts a conclusion that does not follow from the propositions eg: Malavalass are from India. Ram is act a Malayali; therefore, he is not from India. 4. Bad Reason Fallacy /Argumentum ad legicam A fallacy wherein bad argument leads to bad conclusion eg You are afraid of cloud, so you don't fly INFORMAL FALLACIES Informal fallacies are results of wrong information, irrelevant assumption, misuse of language, lack of evidence, of wrong analogy. Sub categories of informal fallacies: There are so many varieties of informal fallacies they can be broken down into subcategories (A) Fallacies of Presumption @) Fallacies of Ambiguity (© Fallacies of Relevance (A) FALLACIES OF PRESUMPTION Presumption of truth without evidence can also cause fallacious reasoning. Examples of these fallacies include: - 1) Complex Question Fallacy - (Also called the "Loaded Question”): Phrasing a (question or statement in such a way as to imply another unproven statement is tue without evidence or discussion. This fallacy often overlaps with begging the question since it also presupposes a definite answer to a previous, unstated question.Eg: "Are you going to admit that you're mad?” Answering yes proves you're mad. Answering 20 implies you accept you are mad, but won't admit it. This question presumes guilt either way. 2) Hasty Generalization Fallacy - (else called “Jumping to Conclusions,” "Converse Accident," and DictoSamplicitss): Mistaken use of inductive seasoning when there are too few samples to prove a point. In understanding and characterizing general cases. a logician cannot normally examine every single example. However, the examples used in inductive reasoning should be typical of the problem or situation at hand. For example. since my friend likes to eat a lot of chicken and Pepsi, and he is healthy, Tcan say that Chicken and Pepsi are healthy and don't really make a person unhealthy. 3) Fallacy of Accident: This error occurs when one applies a general rule to a particular case when accidental circumstances render the general rule inapplicable. A good example of an accident fallacy could be assuming that ‘birds can fly” applies to all birds, and therefore arguing, or even just believing, that a penguin can fly. While the statement that birds can fly is not false — because most birds can fly — penguins are an exception. Penguins are among the limited number of flightless birds and it would be logically fallacious to conclude otherwise based on the premise ‘birds can fly. 4) Causel fallacwPost Hoc, Erso Propter Hoc - This (meaning "after this, therefore ‘because of this") is based upon an assumption of cause and effect, A happened, then B happened, so A must have caused B. Eg: You used my mobile last and ite touch is aot working aow. You damaged my mobile 5) Cum Hoc, Ergo Propter Hoc - This fallacy (meaning "with this, therefore because of this") is when the person making the argument connects two events that happen simultaneously and assumes that one caused the other. Eg: Hospitals are full of sick people. Therefore hospitals make people sick.6) Slippery Slope Fallacy - This falsely assumes the consequences of actions. (also called "The Camel's Nose Fallacy") is a non sequitur in which the speaker argues that, ‘once the first step is undertaken, a second or third step will inevitably follow, much like the way one step on a slippery incline will cause a persoa to fall and slide all the way to the bottom. It is also called "the Camel's Nose Fallacy” because of the image of a sheik who let his camel stick its nose into its tent on a cold aight. The idea is that the sheik is afraid to let the camel stick its nose into the tent because once the beast sticks in its nose, it will inevitably stick in its head. and then its neck, and eventually its whole body. However, this sort of thinking does not allow for any possibility of stopping the process. It simply assumes that, once the nose is in. the rest must follow—that the sheik can't stop the progression once it has begun--and thus the argument is a logical fallacy. Eg- Ifyou buy her a bike today. tomorrow she will need a flight. 7) Tu Quogue Fallacy (Latin for "And you too!”"), - This applics the concept of "Look who's talking” and is used to turn criticism against the other person. Here it asserts that the advice or argument must be false simply because the person presenting the advice doesn't always follow it herself. Eg: Dad why are you scolding me for smoking when you also smoked when you are a college student. 8) Whataboutery Fallacy + Whataboutism, also known as yyhataboutesy. is 2 variant of the tu quoque logical fallacy thet attempts to discredit an opponent's position by charging them with hypocrisy without directly refuting or disproving their argument. 9) Appeal to Ignorance - Or Arguing from Tenorance, these fallacies abound in everyday conversation, advertising, _— politics, = and_———_history. Bg: Argument from Ignorance He is not in Indian Capital because now he is in Delhi.10) Circular Argument - Also referred to a3 Cisculus in Probando, this fallacy is when an argument takes its proof from a factor within the argument itself, rather than from an extemal one. Often the authors word the two statements sufficiently differently to obscure the fact that that the same proposition occurs as both a premise and a conclusion. Eg: Repeating the initial argument. 11) Begging the Question [Petitio principii’ Any form of argument where the conclusion is assumed in one of the premises Begging the question is a form of circular seasoning. Eg: The Apple Phone is the best smartphone on the planet because no one makes a better smartphone than Apple does. 12) False Dilemma- Sometimes referred to as Bifurcation, this type of fallacy occurs when someone presents their argument in such a way that there are only two possible options, Eg: If you don't vote for this candidate, you must be a Communist. 13) ent from a Lack of Evidence entum Ad Igncrantiam): Appealing to a lack of information to prove a point, or arguing that, since the opposition cannot disprove a claim, the opposite must be tue An example of such an argument is the assertion that ghosts must exist because no one hhas been able to prove that they do not exist. Gandhi never said you can't make a citizenship law. (B) FALLACIES OF AMBIGUITY: A fallacy can also be caused by a lack of clarity or by a misunderstanding of the words. Examples of these fallacies include: 1) Accent Fallacies - These are based on the stress or emphasis of a word or word parts being unclear. Depending on which word is stressed in the sentence "I didn't take the test yesterday”, has several meanings, such as someone else took the test or I took it another day.2) Equivocation Fallacies - These occur when words are used multiple times with different meanings. That is, using a word in a different way then the author used it in the original premise, or changing definitions halfway through a discussion. When we use the same word or phrase in different senses within one line of argument, we commit the fallacy of equivocation. Eig: The tree has bark Dogs bark So Dog is a tree 3) Amphiboly (from the Greek word “indeterminate”): This fallacy is a subtype of equivocation. Here, the ambiguity results from grammatical construction. A statement may be true according to one interpretation of how each word functions in a sentence and false according to another. When a premise works with an interpretation that is true, ‘but the conclusion uses the secondary “false” interpretation, we have the fallacy of amphiboly on our hands. e.g.: In the command, “Save soap and waste paper,” the amphibolean use of the word waste results in the problem of determining whether "waste" functions asa verb (Should Isave the soap but waste all the paper?) or as an adjective ("Is that a pile of waste paper Ishould save along with the soap?"). Free him not hang him 4) Straw Man Fallacies - These include misrepresentations to make an argument look weak. A straw man fallacy occurs when someone takes another person's argument or point, distorts it or exaggerates it in some kind of extreme way, and then attacks the extreme distortion, as if that is seally the claim the first person is making I think pollution from humans contributes to climate change. So, you think humans are directly sesponsible for extreme weather, like hurricanes, and have caused the droughts. 5) Fallacy of composition: This fallacy is a result of reasoning from the properties of the parts of the whole to the properties of the whole itself--it is an inductive error. Such. an argument might hold that, because every individual part of a large tractor is lightweight, the entire machine also must be lightweight. 6) Fallacy of division: This fallacy is the reverse of composition. Itis the misapplication of deductive reasoning. One fallacy of division argues falsely that what is true of the whole must be true of individual partse.g: Mr. Smith is an employee of an influential company, he must be an influential individual. Another fallacy of division attributes the properties of the whole to the individual member of the whole. "Migreisch is an immoral business incorporation that engages in unethical trading schemes. Susan Jones is an officer at Microtech. She must be an immoral individual.” (Q)FALLACIES OF RELEVANCE These fallacies attempt to persuade people with irrelevant information, appealing to ‘emotions rather than logic. Examples of these fallacies include: 1) Appeal to Authority - also referred to as Argumentum ad Verecuadiam (argument from modesty). In this case, rather than focusing on the merits of an argument, the arguer will try to attach their argument to a person of authority in order to give credence to their argument. Eg: Well. Newton believed in God. do you think you know more than Newton ? White Dr about paste Kohli about boost 2) Appeal to Popular Opinion /Argumentum Ad Populum - This type of appeal is when someone claims that an idea or belief is true simply because it is what most people believe. Eg: Lots of people saw this series, so it must be good. 3) Argumentum Ad Hominem/ Attacking the Person -this is quite a common occurrence in debates and refers to a person who substitutes a rebuttal with 2 personal insult Eg: Dont listen to PM's arguments on education. He dida't even finish Graduation. This practice is fallacious because the personal character of an individual is logically irrelevant to the truth or falseness of the argument itself. "2+2—1" is true regardless if is stated by a criminal, congressman, or a pastor. That's not 2 good point it was given by MrX.4) Bandwagon Fallacy - “Everybody is doing it” This argumentum ad populum asserts that, since the majority of people believes an argument or chooses a particular course of action, the argument must be true or the course of action must be the best one. This contains arguments that are only appealing because of current trends and growing popularity. Eg: Everyone is going to get the new smart phone when it comes out this weekend, 5) Gambler's Fallacy - This assumes that short-term deviations will correct themselves. Eg: This coin has landed heads-up nine times in a row. So it will probably land tails-up next time it is tossed. 6) Genetic Fallacy - The genetic fallacy is the claim that, because an idea, product, or person must be wrong because of its origin. Eg: "That car can't possibly be any good! It was made in China!” This type of fallacy is closely related to the fallacy of argumentum ad hominem. 7) Red Herring Fallacy - This uses irrelevant information or other techniques to distract, ‘from the argument at hand “A red herring is a deliberate attempt to change the subject or divert the argument from. the real question at issue: Another e.g: You bring up gay marriage and claim that I'm against it but isn't it just as, ‘important to talk about the issue of refugees and citizenship less veterans. Did you know that I volunteer at a refugee centre? There are Starving Children in Africa have your food.8) Weak Analogy - These fallacies employ analogies between things that are not really alike. Eg: Cars kill people just like guas, but if youre not going to baa the sale of cars you can't ban the sale of guns. Its simple human even reached moon, 9) Appeal to Force: (Argumentum ad Baculum, or the “Might Makes Right” Fallacy): This argument uses force, the threat of force, or some other unpleasant backlash to make the audience accept a conclusion. It commonly appears as a last resort when evidence or rational arguments fail to convince. Logically, this consideration has nothing to do with the merits of the points under consideration. Example: You agree with our idea our officers will not search you. “THIS STUDY MATERIAL IS EXCLUSIVELY FOR AIFERITES. NOT TO BE SHARED @) www.aifer.in (wa) education@aifer.in