The Power of Logic - Chapter 4
Terms in this set (24)
An error in reasoning that involves the explicit use of an invalid form.
Errors in reasoning that do not involve the explicit use of an invalid form. 1) Fallacies of irrelevance 2) Fallacies involving ambiguity 3) Fallacies involving unwarranted assumptions
Ad Hominem - Argument Against the Person (Fallacy of Irrelevance)
The argument against the person (or ad hominem fallacy) involves attacking the person who advances the argument. Three forms:
Abusive ad hominem, Circumstantial ad hominem, Tu quoque
Abusive ad hominem
Direct personal attack on the opponent.
Circumstantial ad hominem
Attempts to discredit by calling attention to the circumstances or situation of the opponent.
Charges the opponent with hypocrisy or inconsistency.
Premises: A misrepresentation of the view is false.
Conclusion: The view itself is false.
Appeal to Force (Ad Baculum Fallacy)
Premises: You can avoid harm by accepting this statement. Conclusion: This statement is true.
Appeal to People (Ad Populum Fallacy)
Premises: You will be accepted or valued if you believe this statement. Conclusion: This statement is true.
Appeal to Pity (Ad Misericordian Fallacy)
Premises: You have reason to pity this person (or group). Conclusion: You should do X for the benefit of this person (or group), although doing X is not called for logically by the reason given.
Appeal to ignorance
Premises: This statement has not been proven true. Conclusion: This statement is false (or may be reasonably believed false).
Premises: This statement has not been proven false. Conclusion: This statement is true (or may be reasonably believed true).
Red Herring (AKA Missing the point or Ignoration Elenchi)
Premises: Something relevant to the topic at hand is described. Conclusion: A distracting but often unnoticed change of subject occurred.
Fallacies Involving Ambiguity
Arguments that contain ambiguous words (phrases or statements)
Equivocation, Amphiboly, Composition,Division
Premises: Contain a key word (or phrase) that is ambiguous. Conclusion: Is reached not by valid logical inference but by trading on the ambiguity of the key word (or phrase).
Premises: Contain a sentence that is ambiguous due to faulty structure (eg grammar or punctuation). Conclusion: Is reached not by valid logical inference but by trading on the structural ambiguity.
Premises: The parts (or members) have attribute X
Conclusion: The whole (or group) has attribute X
Premises: The whole (or group) has attribute X
Conclusion: The parts (or members) have attribute X
Fallacies Involving Unwarranted Assumptions
An unwarranted assumption is one that, in context, stands in need of support.
Begging the question (Petitio Principii),
Appeal to Unreliable Authority (Ad Vercundiam Fallacy),
False Cause Fallacy,
Begging the Question (Petitio Principii)
Assuming the point to be proved
(The premises are similar in content to the conclusion but not better known than the conclusion.)
Using a premise that unjustifiably reduces the number of alternatives to be considered.
Appeal to Unreliable Authority (Ad Vercundiam Fallacy)
Appealing to an authority when the reliability of the authority may reasonably be doubted (The arguer assumes, without sufficient warrant, that the authority in question is reliable.)
False Cause Fallacy
Illegitimately assuming that one possible cause of a phenomenon is a (or the) cause although reasons are lacking from excluding other possible causes.
Adding a question that illegitimately presupposes some conclusion alluded to in the question.
Slippery Slope Fallacy
The arguer assumes that a chain reaction will occur but there is insufficient evidence that one (or more) events in the chain will cause the others.
OTHER SETS BY THIS CREATOR
The Power of Logic - Chapter 8
Your Cosmic Context - Chapter 6
Conversion, Obversion, Contraposition
The Power of Logic - Chapter 7
THIS SET IS OFTEN IN FOLDERS WITH...
The Power of Logic - Chapter 1
The Power of Logic - Chapter 2
The Power of Logic - Chapter 5
The Power of Logic - Chapter 6