FALLACY

ARGUMENT

• An argument consists of one or more premises

and one conclusion.
• A premise is a statement (a sentence that is
either true or false) that is offered in support of
the claim being made, which is the conclusion
(which is also a sentence that is either true or
false).
• Latin term Fallere meaning to “to deceive” or
“to appear false or deceptive”.
• Fallacy is an error in argumentation.
• As a rule, an argument is not considered
fallacious unless it is plausible enough to
appear to provide adequate evidence for its
conclusion.
• It is a type of argument that may seem to be
valid but which proves, upon examination, not
to be so.
• It usually begins by appealing to some genuine
truths. However, these truth are often
presented in such ambiguous and general way
that they are easily distorted.
• One’s understanding of fallacy may be used
for good – in order to avoid or expose error; or
it may be used for evil – in order to subtly
deceive.
• Sophism or Sophistry – is a fallacy
committed intentionally to deceive or mislead
an audience into taking some action based on
false information.
• Paralogism – is a fallacy employed
unknowingly or through the ignorance of the
rules of correct reasoning.
Fallacy can either be formal or informal

• Formal fallacy – is one which involves an error in

the form, arrangement, or technical structure of an
argument.
• Informal fallacy – is committed when irrelevant
psychological factors are allowed to distort the
reasoning process as one uses pity or threat or
character assassination, or when one is confused by
linguistic ambiguities in one’s premises and
conclusions.
INFORMAL FALLACY

A. Fallacy of Language/Ambiguity – it expresses lack

of preciseness in the words, phrases or sentences
uses to express thought.
1. Equivocation – is committed when a word carrying
different meaning is used in the same context in a
particular argument.
Example:
Philosophy is an art
But, art is practiced by painters
Therefore, philosophy is also practiced by painters.
Example:
“Logic is the study of arguments. Well, that is one
course that I could ace. I know all about arguments. I
have learned from experts. You should hear the
arguments my parents have.”
2. Amphiboly – is committed when the awkward construction of
one’s sentence allows a double meaning caused by
inexactness of expression.
• The grammatical construction of a sentence is not clear and
therefore open to different interpretations.
Example:
He: Can I have your name, Miss?
She: Why, don’t you already have one?\

Newspaper ad: Dog for sale. Eats anything and is especially

fond of children.
• The story is told about a policeman who
arrived at the accident scene.
“Who of you saw the whole accident?” he
asked.
Hesitantly, a farmer came forward and said he
saw a black van sideswipe a man on a bicycle
and speed away. “ Nakuha mo ba ang plate
number (Did you get the plate number)? The
policeman asked.
“ No sir, nakaturnilyo naman ho ( No sir, it
was bolted to the van), was the farmer’s reply.
3. Prosody – arises from a false emphasis in the speech. A
false stress of voice is placed upon a given word in order to
mislead, confuse, or produce a wrong interpretation.
Example:

I resent the letter.

I resent the letter.

When apologizing, saying “I’m sorry” in a low voice means

you’re apologetic; saying “I’m sorry” in a rising tone means
you’re not.
4. Composition – arises when a property of the parts is illicitly
taken to belong to the whole. It consists in taking collectively
what should be taken individually. It states that whatever is true
of each member of a given set of objects is true of the set itself.
Example:
Thieves and murderers are excluded from the kingdom of
heaven, according to Cajus. But he denies that he is excluded
since he is only a thief not a murderer.

This must be an excellent basketball team, because its players

are all excellent.
5. Division – arises when a property of the whole is illicitly taken
to belong to its parts. It consists in taking individually what
should be taken collectively. It states that what is true of the whole
is true of the parts of the whole.
Example:
Maureen’s hair is damaged.
Therefore, each strand is damaged.

All soldiers are an army

But the commanding general is a soldier
Therefore, the commanding general is an army.

Japan is a rich country

Therefore, every Japanese is rich
6. Word Construction – infers a similarity of meaning from
the similarity of the material pattern of the two words.

Example:
Infinite means without limit;
Indefective means without defect
Therefore, indebted means without debt.
B. Fallacy of Relevance - this kind of fallacy arises when
something about an argument tempts us simply to overlook the
fact that there really is no connection between the premises and
the conclusion.
The argument excites us somehow, and we are mislead into
thinking that the premises support the conclusion, when actually
they have nothing to do with the point supposedly being proven.
Other term ignoratio elenchi.

• All children should have ample attention from their parents.

• Parents who work full-time cannot give ample attention to their
children.
• Therefore, mothers should not work full time.
1. Accident – this fallacy is committed when anyone argues that
what is true as a general rule is also true in some special
cases.

Example:
We have to be generous to others.
Therefore, during examination we have to share our answers
with our seatmate to show that we are generous.

Anything stressful is bad for one’s health, but studying is

stressful, so we should not study at all.
2. Petitio Principii – an argument is called petitio principii
(begging the question) if the arguments fails to prove
anything because it somehow takes for granted what is
supposed to prove. The premise of the argument is simply a
restatement of the conclusion.
Example:
“Why are you late?”
“Well, because I’m not early.”

“Why did you fail in the test?”

“Because I did not pass!”
3. Argumentum ad Hominem (Attack against Man) – is an
attack on the character of the person rather than a challenge
to the merit of his argument.
The accusation must be irrelevant to the substantial issue and
is merely an attempt to divert the discussion away from the
central issue.

3 Forms of argument:
a. Abusive - consist in attacking the person instead of
proving or disproving the point at issue.
Example:
Don’t believe him! He’s gay!

This is why a woman shouldn’t do a man’s job.

b. Circumstantial (Poisoning the well) – it directs attention to
the special circumstances that might cause the first arguer to
take such a particular position.
Example:
“It is perfectly acceptable to have a mistress. I hope you won’t
argue otherwise given that you’re quite happy with the other
woman you have!”

Oh yeah, a man, and not a woman, for president sounds great!

Look who’s proposing it: a male chauvinist!
c. Look who’s talking (Tu quoque/ you too) – it attempts to defend
oneself from criticism by turning the critique back against the
accuser. Whether the person is guilty of the same mistake/crime
or is not irrelevant to the truth of the original charge.
Tu quoque can be very effective scheme to put the accuser on the
defensive and to compel him to defend himself against the
accusation.
Example:
Ronald: “You cheated in the test. Don’t you realize it’s wrong?”
Rollo: “Hey, wait a minute, Ronald. Don’t you forget that you
copied Noel’s answer in Symbolic Logic last time! Now, what’s
your problem?!”

You say I’m not pretty; look who’s talking.

4. Argumentum Ad Populum ( Appeal to the People) – this
fallacy is committed when one attempts to win popular assent
to a conclusion by using a persuasively emotive language. The
argument’s claim is predicted on popular opinion as a
justification of the claim rather than on the reason and
evidence. The presumption that if enough people believe
something, then it must be true.
Example:
Pres. Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo cheated in the 2004
Presidential elections according to the latest survey. Since this
is what the majority of the Filipino think, the she must have
really cheated.
5. Argumentum Ad Misericodiam (Appeal to Pity) – it consist
in pleading the mercy and disregarding the point in question.
The appeal must be irrelevant to the conclusion being sought.

Example:
A student should be giving a passing grade because he is soon
to graduate, or because if he fails the course his parents would
kill him.

Go ahead. Live with your boyfriend. Who am I to say “No” ?

I’m just your mother. Break my heart.
6. False Cause (post hoc ergo propter hoc/ after this, therefore
because of this) – it consist in arguing that because some
events happened after another event (post hoc), therefore, the
former event must have be caused by the latter event (propter
hoc). Just because two events occur one after the other in a
sequence does not mean that they are casually related.

Example:
Charmee became crazy because she took a bath during her
menstrual period.

She sings in the kitchen; therefore, she will remain an

unmarried woman all her life.
7. Argumentum Ad Verecundian (Appeal to misplaced authority) – this
fallacy is evident in an argument based not on the intrinsic merits of a
view in question but on the prestige or fame of the person endorsing the
view.
We must not often rely upon expert opinion when drawing conclusions
about technical matters where we lack the time or expertise to form an
informed opinion. In one cites an “authority” who is not expert on the
issue, that is, the person who supplies the opinion is no an expert at all, or
is one, but in an unrelated area, thus the argumentum ad vericundian is
committed.

Example:
Sleeping with your hair wet can make you blind. That’s true! That’s what
our gardener said!

These pills must be safe and effective in reducing. They have been
endorsed by Miss X, star of stage, screen and television.
8. Argumentum Ad Baculum (Appeal to Force) – this fallacy
appeals to physical force or moral pressure rather than merit of
the point at issue to win an argument.

Example:
College Dean to a teacher:
“You better think twice before giving that student a failing
grade. Remember, he is the nephew of the university
president.”

“You should choose to work more overtime at the same rate of

pay. After all, you wouldn’t want to lose your job, would you?”
9. Appeal to Advantage – an appeal is made to a person to adhere
to a policy, or perform an act contrary to the person’s will. But
he is forced to do it because the advantage preferred is given.
Example:
A rich man offers to pay the hospital bill of a beautiful young
girl’s sick mother, provided the girl allows herself to be his
mistress.

A religious political leader offers a person a job, provided the

person joins his religion and accepts his beliefs.
10. Argumentum Ad Ignorantiam (Appeal to Ignorance) – this
argument is committed whenever on agues that something must
be true on the basis that it has not been proved false, or false on
the basis it has not been proved true.

Example:
If you can’t prove me wrong, then I must be right!

Two days ago, we reported someone saw Fr. John and Ms. Jane
together. If it’s not true, they will categorically deny it. Since
they did not, it only affirms our suspicion that there is really an
illicit affair going on between them.
ACTIVITY: ACTIVITY:

Choose any two Choose any two categories

categories from the topic from the topic “Fallacy of
“Fallacy of Relevance” and give one
Language/Ambiguity” example for each.
and give one example for
each.
THANK YOU!