ARGUMENTS

AND FALLACIES
ARGUMENTS OFTEN TAKE
THE FORM OF
STATEMENTS THAT ARE
EITHER CLAIMS OR FACTS
AND ARE PHRASED IN
SUCH A WAY THAT THEY
SEEM REASONABLE.
FALLACIES ARE
ARGUMENTS BASED ON
FAULTY REASONING.
SOME OF THESE
FALLACIES MAY BE
INTENTIONAL, AS THE
PERSON MAKING THE
CLAIM IS DESPERATE TO
CONVINCE YOU TO ACCEPT
HIS OR HER ARGUMENT.
THE FOLLOWING ARE
EXAMPLES OF
FALLACIES
APPEAL TO PITY
(Argumentum ad misericordiam)

-A SPECIFIC KIND OF APPEAL TO

EMOTION

-USING EMOTIONS SUCH AS

PITY OR SYMPATHY
“ALL THESE CHARGES
ARE BASELESS; THIS IS
JUST PLAIN
HARRASSMENT – CAN’T
YOU SEE HOW THIS IS
AFFECTING MY FAMILY?”
PITY = ARGUMENT?

THIS ARGUMENT IS
ILLOGICAL
APPEAL TO IGNORANCE
(Argumentum ad
ignorantiam)
WHATEVER HAS NOT
BEEN PROVED FALSE
MUST BE TRUE, AND
VICE VERSA.
“SINCE YOU CANNOT
PROVE THAT YOU DID NOT
STEAL THE MONEY,
THEREFORE, YOU STOLE
THE MONEY.”
EQUIVOCATION
THIS IS A LOGICAL CHAIN OF
REASONING OF A TERM OR A
WORD SEVERAL TIMES, BUT
GIVING THE PARTICULAR WORD A
DIFFERENT MEANING EACH TIME.

- CALLING TWO DIFFERENT

THINGS BY THE SAME NAME
EQUIVOCATION
A TERM OR WORD SWITCHES
MEANING IN THE COURSE OF THE
ARGUMENT

- WHEN A TERM OR WORD EXPRESSES

ONE MEANING IN ONE PREMISE AND
ANOTHER MEANING IN ANOTHER
PREMISE OR CONCLUSION
HANNA WENT TO THE BALL LAST
NIGHT. MARKO, HIS BROTHER,
PLAYED WITH THE BALL .

I HAVE THE RIGHT TO FREE

SPEECH, SO IT’S RIGHT FOR ME
TO SAY WHATEVER I WANT.
PHILOSOPHY IS AN ART.
BUT ART IS PRACTICED BY
PAINTERS.
THEREFORE, PHILOSOPHY IS
ALSO PRACTICED BY
PAINTERS.
ALL STARS ARE HEAVENLY BODIES.
BUT ANGELINA JOLIE AND BRAD
PITT ARE STARS.
THEREFORE, THERE IS A GOOD
REASON TO BELIEVE THAT
ANGELINA JOLIE AND BRAD PITT
ARE HEAVENLY BODIES.
FALLACY OF
COMPOSITION
ASSUMES THAT WHAT IS
TRUE OF A PART IS TRUE
FOR THE WHOLE.
“THESE CASES OF
ROBBERY IN THIS
DISTRICT SHOWS THAT
THE CITY HAS BECOME A
DEN OF THIEVES AND
CRIMINALS.”
FALLACY OF DIVISION
(FALSE DEDUCTION)
ASSUMES THAT WHAT IS
TRUE FOR THE WHOLE
IS TRUE FOR ITS PART.
“YOU COME FROM A
FAMILY OF DOCTORS AND
INTELLECTUALS, I AM
SURE YOU ARE
INTELLIGENT TOO!”
“ONE OF THE CAUSES OF
POVERTY IS LAZINESS.
SINCE 80 PERCENT OF THE
FILIPINO PEOPLE ARE POOR,
THEN IT CAN BE LOGICALLY
ARGUED THAT THE FILIPINO
PEOPLE ARE LAZY.”
AGAINST THE PERSON
(Argumentum ad hominem)
ATTACKS THE PERSON
PRESENTING THE ARGUMENT
INSTEAD OF THE ARGUMENT
ITSELF.
“HE CANNOT BE A
MAYOR BECAUSE HE IS A
WOMANIZER.”
APPEAL TO FORCE
(Argumentum ad baculum)
AN ARGUMENT WHERE
FORCE, COERCION, OR
THREAT OF FORCE IS
GIVEN AS A JUSTIFICATION
FOR AN ARGUMENT.
-ARISES WHEN AN
ARGUER, INSTEAD OF
USING EVIDENCE,
APPEALS TO INTIMIDATION
OR USE FORCE TO GAIN
ACCEPTANCE OF HIS/ HER
ARGUMENT
“YOU SHOULD STUDY
NURSING; OTHERWISE, I
WILL NOT SEND YOU TO
COLLEGE.”
“IF THIS PEACE
AGREEMENT WILL NOT
BE SIGNED BY THE
GOVERNMENT, THEN WE
WILL HAVE NO
RECOURSE BUT GO TO
WAR.”
THE ARGUER POSES A
THREAT TO THE
LISTENER:

“ACCEPT MY
CONCLUSION OR YOU
WILL BE SORRY!”
APPEAL TO THE PEOPLE
(Argumentum ad populum)
AN ARGUMENT THAT
APPEALS TO PEOPLE’S
VANITIES, DESIRE FOR
ESTEEM , AND ANCHORING
ON POPULARITY.
APPEAL TO THE PEOPLE
(Argumentum ad populum)
ARISES WHEN ONE WHO, INSTEAD
OF CONCENTRATING ON THE
RELEVANT FACTS OF ARGUMENT,
GIVES MORE EMPHASIS ON THE
EMOTIONS AND OPINIONS OF THE
PEOPLE AS THE BASIS OF HER
CONCLUSION
“EVERY BOY YOUR AGE
ALREADY HAS A
GIRLFRIEND, YOU
SHOULD GO FIND ONE!”
“TIDE ULTRA IS BETTER
THAN SURF BECAUSE
MANY FILIPINOS USED
IT!”
HOW TO RECOGNIZE THE FALLACY OF
APPEAL TO PEOPLE:
1. IF THE CONCLUSION OF AN
ARGUMENT IS BASED ON THE
ASSERTIONS ABOUT COMMONLY OR
TRADITIONALLY HELD BELIEFS;
AND/OR
2. IF AN ARGUMENT HAS NO SOLID
EVIDENCE THAT CAN BACK UP THE
CLAIM
HASTY GENERALIZATION

REACHING AN INDUCTIVE
GENERALIZATION BASED
ON INSUFFICIENT
EVIDENCE.
-WHEN A GENERALIZATION IS
FORMED ON THE BASIS OF AN,
UNREPRESENTIVE SAMPLE
-A GENERALIZATION ABOUT A
GROUP, SHOULD BE BASED
UPON A SAMPLE THAT
REFLECTS A DIVERSITY OF
THAT GROUP
ENSURING A
REPRESENTATIVE
SAMPLE = TO SELECT AS
LARGE SAMPLE AS
POSSIBLE
BEGGING THE QUESTION
(Petitio principii)
“APPEALING TO THE
FIRST PRINCIPLE”
- ASSUMING THE THING
OR IDEA TO BE PROVEN
TRUE.
“USES PART OF ITS
CONCLUSION IN ITS OWN
PREMISE AS SUPPORT”

- THIS IS A TYPE OF
CIRCULAR REASONING
OFTEN THIS FALLACY
OCCURS WHEN ONE USES
TWO DIFFERENT WORDS,
ONE IN THE PREMISES AND
ONE IN THE CONCLUSION,
WHICH SHARE THE SAME
DEFINITION.
“I HAVE THE RIGHT TO
FREE SPEECH,
THEREFORE YOU
CANNOT STOP ME FROM
TALKING.”
“ABORTION IS WRONG
BECAUSE ABORTION IS
UNETHICAL.”
APPEAL TO TRADITION

AFFIRMING THAT THE

IDEA IS ACCEPTABLE
BECAUSE IT HAS BEEN
TRUE FOR A LONG TIME.
“ASTROLOGY HAS BEEN
AROUND FOR
CENTURIES. AS PEOPLE
HAVE BEEN FOLLOWING
IT FOR HUNDREDS OF
YEARS, IT OBVIOUSLY
WORKS.”
NON SEQUITUR
(“DOES NOT FOLLOW”)
THE GENERIC FALLACY
A CONCLUSION DOES NOT
FOLLOW FROM THE
STATEMENTS THAT LEAD TO
IT.
“EVER SINCE YOU
BOUGHT THAT
SWEATER, EVERYTHING
HAS BEEN GOING
WRONG ON YOUR LIFE.
YOU SHOULD GET RID OF
IT.”
LOGICAL FALLACY- ANY
KIND OF ERROR IN
REASONING THAT
RENDERS AN ARGUMENT
INVALID
FORMAL FALLACY-
DETECTABLE BY AN
EXAMINATION OF THE
FORM OF ARGUMENT
TECHNIQUES USED BY LOGICIANS
IN DETERMINING THE VALIDITY OF
ARGUMENTS:

TRADITION AND SYMBOLIC LOGIC

-8 RULES OF SYLLOGISM
-TRUTH TABLE
-PARTIAL TRUTH TABLE
INFORMAL FALLACY-
DETECTABLE BY AN
EXAMINATION OF
CONTENT OF THE
ARGUMENT ITSELF