A precursor to deductive and inductive thought; the process of developing a hypothesis or a "hunch" based on a limited amount of information.
(From the Latin, "to the man") Attacking a person's views by attacking his or her character. (Type of red herring).
Having more than one possible meaning or interpretation.
Compares more than one possible meaning or interpretation.
A process in which a speaker, writer, or artist tries to elicit a desired response from an audience by identifying commonalities in the interests of both parties.
Argument by analogy
Claims that since two items have a given attribute in common, they must also share a second, distinct point of similarity; an argument of the form:
1. A is like B.
2. B has property of X.
3. Therefore, A also has property of X.
Argument from doubtful or unidentified authority
"We ought to castrate all sex offenders; Uncle Oswald says we should." Or: "According to reliable sources, my opponent is lying". (Type of red herring).
Conclusion one draws based on some combination of reasons and assumptions.
Provides the connection between the evidence or proof and the conclusions drawn form the proof (the unseen glue in an argument).
The human tendency to make decisions on the basis of the majority opinion.
Begging the question
Taking for granted for the start what you set out to demonstrate. When you reason in a logical way, you state that because something is true, then, as a result, some other truth follows. When you beg the question, however, you repeat that what is true is true. If you argue, for instance, that dogs are a menace to people because they are dangerous, you don't prove a thing. Beggars of questions often just repeat what they already believe, only in different words.
The act of producing an effect.
The human tendency to perceive patterns where no pattern exists.
In inductive reasoning, an argument that is strong and consists of premises that are all true.
Hard-wired preferences for certain flawed reasoning patterns.
A third statement produced form two statements or propositions taken to be true.
The tendency to view information in a way that validates our existing opinions and beliefs.
The relationship between two factors.
Cum hoc, ergo propter hoc
"With this, therefore because of this.". Occurs when a speaker assumes there is a causal relationship between two facts simply because they occur at the same time.
A method of organizing arguments by drawing a conclusion based on a general principle (such as the Declaration of Independence).
Definition of terms
Explaining or clarifying a word or expression.
An ethical fallacy; a writer who attempts to persuade by asserting or assuming that a particular position is the only one conceivably acceptable within a community is trying to enforce dogmatism. Indeed, dogmatism is a problem of character because the tactic undermines the trust that must exist between those who would make and those who would receive arguments. In effect, people who speak or write dogmatically imply that there are no arguments to be mad: the truth is self-evident to those who know better (Lunford and Ruszkiewicz.)
Either/ or Reasoning
Assuming that a reality may be divided into only two parts or extremes; assuming that a given problem has only one of two possible solutions.
A type of red herring fallacy in which the speaker elicits strong emotions to distract the audience from the facts of the argument. (Type of red herring).
A compact deductive argument.
Two meanings at the same time in one word of phrase.
Fallacy of interrogation
A form of question that is logically flawed.
The claim of persuasive likeness when no significant likeness exists.
An either-or situation in which the writer implies that we have only two choices.
Occurs when an individual is presented with two identical options that are described in different terms and responds differently depending on how the issue is present, or "framed".
An incorrect connection between the evidence and the conclusion.
The mistaken belief that the results of a random event, like a coin toss, will affect the probability of future outcomes.
Guilt by association
A type of ad hominem fallacy in which the speaker attempts to malign an opponent by associating him or her with a negative concept. (Type of red herring).
Leaping to a generalization from inadequate or faulty evidence. The most familiar hasty generalization is the stereotype: "Men aren't sensitive enough to be day-care providers." "Women are too emotional to fight in combat.". A type of weak analogy.
The tendency to erroneously view oneself as superior to others.
A method of organizing an argument by generalizing from the specific data.
The process of drawing a particular conclusion form the available information.
Least-to-most important in organization
Starts with less strong assertion and builds up the the strongest ones in order to establish a sense of momentum and emphasize the most important points.
A fallacy of interrogation. "Do you no longer support the death penalty?" The assumption is that person did support the death penalty at one time.
The formal study of reasoning.
An error in reasoning that makes a deductive argument invalid or inductive argument weak.
A content-level error that makes an argument weak; informal fallacies usually apply to inductive arguments, but some can apply to deductive arguments as well.
An error in the structure of an argument that renders a deductive argument invalid.
Reason, logic, words.
Appeal to logos/ logical appeal
An attempt to persuade through rational analysis and persuasive language.
Non causa pro causa
The fallacy of mistaken causation.
An erroneous connection between the evidence and the conclusion.
Excluding facts that would disprove the assertion.
Supplying neat and easy explanations for large and complicated phenomena.
Emotion, especially pity or compassion.
Appeal to pathos/ pathetic appeal
An attempt to persuade by eliciting an emotional response from the audience.
Post Hoc, ergo propter hoc
"After this, therefore because of this.". Occurs when a speaker attempts to argue that one thing has caused another simply because one event occurred after the other.
Another word for assumption and reasons (formal logic).
Proof that an argument or statement is wrong; the answer to an assumption, point of view, o statement with which one disagrees.
A distraction inserted into an argument. Diverts attention from the true issues of a debate by emphasizing irrelevant information.
Occurs when an individual claims an undue amount of credit for a positive situation or and inadequate amount of blame for a negative condition.
A widely accepted, simplistic view of people who belong to a given group; this fallacy is a type of hasty generalization, which is itself a sub-type of the weak analogy fallacy. A common form of hasty generalization.
Occurs when a speaker avoids addressing an opponent's argument directly by instead creating and attacking a "dummy" argument that does not accurately represent the opponent's stance. (Type of red herring).
A deductive argument composed of two premises (major and minor) and a conclusion.
The main assertion in an argument.
Ethical- perspective of the author.