FALLACY

JUDGE: “Totoo bang hinawakan mo ang hita

ng babaing ito?”

NGONGO: “Hini po, hini po your honor!”

JUDGE: “Pilosopo! Hinawakan o hinipo,

pareho lang yun! Guilty!”
FALLACY . . .

• It comes from the Latin term fallere or fallo which means

“to deceive.”
• It is an erroneous reasoning.
• It is a type of argument that may seem to be valid but
which proves, upon examination, not be so.
• One who deliberately employs such deceptive
arguments to mislead another is called “sophist” and
his “art” is not philosophy but “sophistry.”
 FALLACIES

Non - Formal
Formal
Violations
governing
the laws of Linguistic/ Non -
Formal Logic Ambiguity linguistic/
Relevance

Oppositional Inferences, Eduction,

Categorical & Hypothetical Syllogisms, et.al.
FORMAL FALLACY

• Are due to a violation of any of the rules

governing the argument or inference.
• Fallacies such as those of illicit minor,
illicit major, undistributed middle term, are
examples of such.
 THE SQUARE OF OPPOSITION

AFFIRMATIVE (+)

NEGATIVE (-)
Summary of the Laws of Opposition:
Law of Contradictories: Governs A – O (vice-versa) and E – I (vice – versa):
If A = True then O = False (vice-versa)
E = True then I = False (vice-versa)

Law of Contraries: Governs the universals A and E

If A = True then E = False A = False the E = ?
E = True then A = False E = False then A = ?
Law of Sub - Contraries: Governs the particulars I and O
If I = True then O = ? I = False the O = True
O = True then I = ? O = False then I = True
Law of Sub – Alternation:
Universals: (Deductive) Governs A and I, E and O
If A = True then I = True E = True the O = True
A = False then I = ? E = False then O = ?
Particulars: (Inductive) Governs I and A, O and E
If I = False then A = False O = False then E = False
I = True then A = ? O = True then E = ?
SAMPLE ANALYSIS OF A STATEMENT:

A school principal once boasted, “I told my teachers that

since some schools are not honestly managed, it follows
that some are honestly managed, and I am proud to tell
you that ours was one of these.”
Is the statement valid?
some schools are not honestly managed (O Statement)
Truth Value = TRUE

it follows that some are honestly managed (I Statement)

Truth Value = TRUE
(Subcontrary) INVALID – IT DOES NOT FOLLOW
 EXAMPLE OF A FORMAL FALLACY
Categorical Syllogism
COPULA (+)
INVALID:
Violation/s:
Formal Validity:
All that has legs are living, • Logical Quadruped (4-
Middle Term (U) Predicate (P) word construction)
Major Premise • Equivocation (the terms
legs mean differently)
Chairs have legs,
Subject (U) Material Validity:
Middle Term (U)
Minor Premise “Not all that has legs are
COPULA (+) living”

Hence, chairs are living

SUBJECT (U) PREDICATE (P)
Conclusion
COPULA (+)
 NON-FORMAL FALLACY

1. FALLACY OF LANGUAGE/AMBIGUITY
- It expresses lack of preciseness in the words, phrases
used to express thought.

2. FALLACY OF RELEVANCE/NON-LINGUISTIC
- It arises when something about an argument tempts
us simply to overlook the fact that there really is
no connection between the premises conclusion.
1. FALLACY OF LANGUAGE
OR AMBIGUITY
1.1 EQUIVOCATION
• Due to the ambiguous use of a word in a sentence or in
an argument.

Lapu-lapu is the killer of Magellan.

Lapu-lapu is a fish.
Therefore, a fish is the killer of Magellan

EMPLOYER TO A JOB APPLICANT: “In this job, we need

someone who is responsible.”
APPLICANT: “Then I’m the one you are looking for. In fact,
in my previous job, whenever something went wrong, they
said I was the one responsible.”
1.2 AMPHIBOLY
• Occurs when a phrase or sentence is ambiguous because of
faulty grammatical construction.

“I would like to buy a clock for my boyfriend with three hands."

Sample clip from the Movie Michael and Madonna
1.3 ACCENT OR PROSODY

• Fallacy which occurs when we make conclusions

based on the faulty
emphasis on certain
parts of the sentence.
“The teacher said the class is lazy” – (what is stressed
here will determine who is lazy – the teacher or the
class)

“The beer ad says, ‘Drink Moderately,’ therefore I have

the right to drink beer as long as in moderation.”
1.3 ACCENT OR PROSODY

A car driver was flagged down by a traffic officer for a violation:

Driver: What’s wrong officer? Did I violate anything?

Enforcer: Did you not see the sign?
Driver: Yes sir! Actually, I wasn’t suppose to come back but the sign
says “No U Turn” and so I turned.
1.3 ACCENT OR PROSODY

• We must respect our elders

(if one puts emphasis on the last two words,
then we would conclude that we may not
respect those who are not elders)
1.4 DIVISION
• Consist in taking separately what should be taken together
or in taking the properties of the whole as properties of the
parts.

“The whole wedding package costs P500,000.

Hence, the wedding cake costs P500,000."

“Human cells must be conscious beings because

human beings are conscious."
1.5 COMPOSITION
• Consists in taking together what should be taken
separately or in taking the properties of the parts as
properties of the whole

His room in the apartment is small.

So, the apartment is small.

Cells have no free will

But humans are compose of cells
Therefore, humans have no free will.

I cannot buy a car. I cannot buy a mansion. Therefore I cannot buy

anything at all…
1.6 PARALLEL - WORD CONSTRUCTION
• Consists in arguing from similarity in word structure to a
similarity in meaning

People from Burma are called Burmese;

People from China are called Chinese;
Therefore, people from the Philippines are called Philippinese.

Responsible Since the opposite

Adorable of finite is infinite,
Incredible
Loveable therefore, the
Perdible opposite of tense
is intense
EXERCISES: Determine the Linguistic Fallacies committed in
the given statements:

1. . . . the universe is spherical in form. . . because all

the constituent parts of the universe, that is the
sun, moon, and the planets, appear in this form.
(Nicolaus Copernicus) COMPOSITION

2. One Indian, two Indians;

One bag, two bags; PARALLEL WORD
One child, two childs. CONSTRUCTION
3. The book of Dan Brown is expensive;
Thus, every page of that book is very expensive DIVISION

4. No husbands please. AMPHIBOLY

5. JUDGE: “Did you say ‘no’?”

ACCUSED: “Yes.” EQUIVOCATION
2. FALLACY OF RELEVANCE/
NON – LINGUISTIC
 NON-FORMAL FALLACY
2. FALLACY OF RELEVANCE/NON-LINGUISTIC
- It arises when something about an argument tempts
us simply to overlook the fact that there really is
no connection between the premises conclusion.
2.1 PETITIO PRINCIPII
(BEGGING THE QUESTION/CIRCULAR ARGUMENT)
• An argument that assumes the truth of the conclusion
to be proved.

“Why are you late? Well, because I am not early.”

"Ice is cold; thus, it is not hot."

"No one has seen God, therefore, there is no God.”

“He is happy because he has no problems and I know

he has no problem because I always see him happy.”
2.2 ACCIDENT:
Consist in the confusion of the accidental and the essential or
necessary elements of a thing; this may also consist in thinking
that because something can be abused, then its use must be
forbidden

• One has to tell the truth always. Thus, if a murderer

confesses his crime to the priest, it is but proper for
the priest to reveal the truth to the police authorities.

• We have to be generous to others.Thus, during

examination we have to share our answers with
our seatmate to show that we are generous.
2.3 FALSE CAUSE (Post hoc ergo, propter hoc)
Consist in assigning a wrong cause to a given effect.

Diego scratches his nose and tummy. After

one minute, the volcano erupts. Hence, the scratching of Diego’s
nose and tummy causes the eruption.

He failed the exam because he took it on Friday the 13 th.

2.4 NON-SEQUITUR
(IRRELEVANT CONCLUSION)

• The Philippines is suffering economically

now because ABS – CBN was no longer
airing.

• Life is a mix of positive and negative

experiences. It is like 1 + 1 – 1.
2.5 ARGUMENTUM AD IGNORANTIAM (Appealing to
Ignorance)

• Argues that something is true because it

can’t be proven as false or asserts that
something is false because it can’t be proven
as true.

“If you can’t prove me wrong, then I must be right.“

“No one has come back to tell us that there is such a
place like hell. Therefore, there is no hell.”
 2.6 ARGUMENTUM AD HOMINEM (argument
directed to the person)

• Ignores the issue and attacks the person or

character of the one arguing.

"We can’t trust this person’s argument! He is an

alcoholic!"

"Don’t believe in him! He’s gay and odorous!“

2.7 ARGUMENTUM AD POPULUM (Appealing
to people)
• Consist in an emotional appeal to the people to
win their assent to a conclusion unsupported by
good evidence.

Many people believed that the earth is flat. Thus, the earth is
flat.

Everyone in the class in cheating in the examinations,

therefore I should also cheat.
2.8 ARGUMENTUM AD VERECUNDIAM (Appeal to misplaced
authority)

• Consists of citing as proofs the statement of someone who happens not

to be an authority on the things in a question.

“These pills must be safe and effective. They have been endorsed by
John Lloyd Cruz, a famous actor.”

A teenager bought a pair of new Air Jordan shoes:

Mom: Wow that looks cool and expensive. Is it durable?
Teenager: I don’t know
Mom: Will it make you good at basketball?
Teenager: No.
Mom: Then why did you buy it?
Teenager: Coz its Michael Jordan’s shoes mom!
2.9 ARGUMENTUM AD MISERICORDIAM (Appeal to pity)
• Argument that appeals to a person’s emotions to get his
assent to a certain conclusion.

“A students should be given a passing grade because he is

soon to graduate, or because if he fails the subject, his
parents would kill him.”

“You honor, my client, John Santos, does not deserve to

be imprisoned. He has five small children, and a wife
suffering from breast cancer.”
“
2.10 ARGUMENTUM AD BACULUM (Appeal to
Force/Might/Threat)
• Consist in the use of threat or force to prove a
certain point

“You better think twice before failing that

student. Remember, he is the son of the Mayor.”