The Classical Argument Rhetorical Fallacies

Rhetorical Fallacies Fallacies are misleading arguments . . . . To call something a fallacy is usually another way of saying it violates one of the rules for good arguments. Fallacies distract readers with various appeals instead of using sound reasoning. Rhetorical Fallacies do not allow for open two-way exchange of ideas.

Rhetorical Fallacies EMOTIONAL FALLACIES –unfair appeal to audience’s emotions (violations of pathos) ETHICAL FALLACIES – unreasonably advance the writer’s own authority or character (violations of ethos) LOGICAL FALLACIES – depend upon faulty logic (violations of logos)

Emotional Fallacies Sentimental Appeals Red Herrings Scare Tactics Bandwagon Appeals Slippery Slope arguments Either/Or Choices False Need Arguments

Sentimental Appeals Use emotion to distract the audience from the facts. Example: The thousand baby seals killed in the Exxon Valdez oil spill have shown us that oil is not a reliable source of energy.

Sentimental Appeals Dear Dr. King, We need divine help from you. It is a RUSH job. Sincerely, The United States of America

Red Herrings Use misleading or unrelated evidence to support a conclusion. Also known as Smoke Screen . Topic A is under discussion. Topic B is introduced under the guise of being relevant to topic A (when topic B is actually not relevant to topic A). Topic A is abandoned.

Red Herrings Ex. "We admit that this measure is popular. But we also urge you to note that there are so many bond issues on this ballot that the whole thing is getting ridiculous."

Red Herrings "Argument" for a tax cut: "You know, I've begun to think that there is some merit in the Republican's tax cut plan. I suggest that you come up with something like it, because If we Democrats are going to survive as a party, we have got to show that we are as tough-minded as the Republicans, since that is what the public wants."

Red Herrings "Argument" for making grad school requirements stricter: "I think there is great merit in making the requirements stricter for the graduate students. I recommend that you support it, too. After all, we are in a budget crisis and we do not want our salaries affected."

Red Herrings

Red Herrings

Red Herrings

Scare Tactics Try to frighten people into agreeing with the arguer by threatening them or predicting unrealistically dire consequences. Y is presented (a claim that is intended to produce fear). Therefore claim X is true (a claim that is generally, but need not be, related to Y in some manner).

Scare Tactics Example: If you don’t support the party’s tax plan, you and your family will be reduced to poverty.

Scare Tactics Ex. "You know, Professor Smith, I really need to get an A in this class. I'd like to stop by during your office hours later to discuss my grade. I'll be in your building anyways, visiting my father. He's your dean, by the way. I'll see you later."

Scare Tactics Ex. “You must believe that God exists. After all, if you do not accept the existence of God, then you will face the horrors of hell."

Scare Tactics Ex. "You shouldn't say such things against multiculturalism! If the chair heard what you were saying, you would never receive tenure. So, you had just better learn to accept that it is simply wrong to speak out against it."

Scare Tactics

Scare Tactics

Scare Tactics

Scare Tactics

Bandwagon Appeals Encourage an audience to agree with the writer because everyone else is doing so. Person P is pressured by his/her peers or threatened with rejection. Therefore person P's claim X is false.

Bandwagon Appeals Example: Paris Hilton carries a small dog in her purse, so you should buy a hairless Chihuahua and put it in your Louis Vuitton.

Bandwagon Appeals Ex. Bill says that he likes the idea that people should work for their welfare when they can. His friends laugh at him, accuse him of fascist leanings, and threaten to ostracize him from their group. He decides to recant and abandon his position to avoid rejection.

Bandwagon Appeals

Bandwagon Appeals

Bandwagon Appeals

Slippery Slope This argument suggests that one thing will lead to another, oftentimes with disastrous results. Event X has occurred (or will or might occur). Therefore event Y will inevitably happen.

Slippery Slope Example: If you get a B in high school, you won’t get into the college of your choice, and therefore will never have a meaningful career.

Slippery Slope Example: You can never give anyone a break. If you do, they'll walk all over you

Slippery Slope Example: We've got to stop them from banning pornography. Once they start banning one form of literature, they will never stop. Next thing you know, they will be burning all the books.

Slippery Slope

Slippery Slope

Slippery Slope

Slippery Slope

Slippery Slope

Either/Or Choices False Dilemma Reduce complicated issues to only two possible courses of action. Either claim X is true or claim Y is true (when X and Y could both be false). Claim Y is false. Therefore claim X is true.

Either/Or Choices False Dilemma Example: The patent office can either approve my generator design immediately or say goodbye forever to affordable energy.

Either/Or Choices False Dilemma Example: Senator Jill: "We'll have to cut education funding this year." Senator Bill: "Why?" Senator Jill: "Well, either we cut the social programs or we live with a huge deficit and we can't live with the deficit."

Either/Or Choices False Dilemma Example: "Look, you are going to have to make up your mind. Either you decide that you can afford this stereo, or you decide you are going to do without music for a while."

Either/Or Choices False Dilemma

Either/Or Choices False Dilemma

Either/Or Choices False Dilemma

Either/Or Choices False Dilemma

Either/Or Choices False Dilemma

False Need These arguments create an unnecessary desire for things. Example: You need an expensive car or people won’t think you are cool.

Ethical Fallacies False Authority Using Authority Instead of Evidence Guilt by Association Dogmatism Moral Equivalence Ad Hominum Poisoning the Well Strawperson

Ethical Fallacies False Authority Asks audiences to agree with the assertion of a writer based simply on his or her character or the authority of another person or institution who may not be fully qualified to offer that assertion. Example: My high school teacher said it, so it must be true.

Ethical Fallacies False Authority Claim: “X is true because I said so.”   Warrant: “What I say must be true.” also  Claim: “X is true because Y says so.” Warrant: “What Y says must be true.”

Ethical Fallacies False Authority Parsing the statement will reveal the invalid conclusion: Claim: “You must not love me.” Reason: “You haven’t bought me that bicycle.” Warrant: “Buying bicycles for children is essential to loving them.”

Ethical Fallacies False Authority The authority of these figures in itself is not evidence for the truth of their views.  Someone cannot point to himself as his own authority.  Because his own authority alone is not enough of a reason to defend what he believes, then there is no reason for anyone else to believe him either!

Ethical Fallacies

Using Authority Instead of Evidence This occurs when someone offers personal authority as proof. Example: Trust me – my best friend wouldn’t do that.

Using Authority Instead of Evidence

Guilt by Association Calls someone’s character into question by examining the character of that person’s associates. Example: Sara’s friend Amy robbed a bank; therefore, Sara is a delinquent.

Guilt by Association

Guilt by Association

Dogmatism Shuts down discussion by asserting that the writer’s beliefs are the only acceptable ones. Example: I’m sorry, but I think penguins are sea creatures and that’s that.

Dogmatism Proposing that there simply cannot be any other possible way of making sense of and engaging with an issue but the one you represent. Example: There’s no way that anyone can argue that abortion is anything other than murder.

Dogmatism Example: There’s no way a man could ever love a man or a woman could ever love a woman as much as a man and a woman can love each other.

Dogmatism

Dogmatism

Dogmatism

Moral Equivalence Compares minor problems with much more serious crimes (or vice versa). Example: These mandatory seatbelt laws are fascist.

Moral Equivalence

Ad Hominum These arguments attack a person’s character rather than the person’s reasoning. Example: Why should we think a candidate who recently divorced will keep her campaign promises.

Ad Hominum A prosecutor asks the judge to not admit the testimony of a burglar because burglars are not trustworthy.

Ad Hominum Francis Bacon's philosophy should be dismissed since Bacon was removed from his chancellorship for dishonesty.

Ad Hominum

Ad Hominum

Poisoning the Well This sort of "reasoning" involves trying to discredit what a person might later claim by presenting unfavorable information (be it true or false) about the person. This "argument" has the following form:

Poisoning the Well Unfavorable information (be it true or false) about person A is presented. Therefore any claims person A makes will be false.

Poisoning the Well "Don't listen to him, he's a scoundrel." Example "Don't listen to him, he's a scoundrel." "Before turning the floor over to my opponent, I ask you to remember that those who oppose my plans do not have the best wishes of the university at heart."

Poisoning the Well

Poisoning the Well

Poisoning the Well

Poisoning the Well

Strawperson These arguments set up and often dismantle easily refutable arguments in order to misrepresent an opponent’s argument in order to defeat him or her.

Strawperson The Straw Man fallacy is committed when a person simply ignores a person's actual position and substitutes a distorted, exaggerated or misrepresented version of that position. This sort of "reasoning" has the following pattern:

Strawperson Person A has position X. Person B presents position Y (which is a distorted version of X). Person B attacks position Y. Therefore X is false/incorrect/flawed.

Strawperson We need to regulate access to handguns. Example: We need to regulate access to handguns. My opponent believes that we should ignore the rights guaranteed to us as citizens of the United States by the Constitution. Unlike my opponent, I am a firm believer in the Constitution, and a proponent of freedom.

Strawperson Butch claims that,  generally speaking, women are far more concerned about their personal appearances than men, pointing out that most make-up is sold to women and that popular women's clothing is often very uncomfortable, but women buy it because it is attractive to men..  Barb replies: "That's totally ridiculous, not all women wear that kind of stuff and lots of men are using make-up these days, too."  This is a straw person because Butch didn't make a claim about all women or men.  Understood in this way, Butch's statements are obviously false.

Strawperson

Strawperson

Strawperson

Strawperson

Logical Fallacies Hasty Generalization Faulty Causality (or Post Hoc) arguments Non Sequitur (Latin for “It doesn’t follow”) Equivocation Begging the Question Faulty Analogy Stacked Evidence

Hasty Generalization Draws conclusions from scanty evidence. This fallacy is committed when a person draws a conclusion about a population based on a sample that is not large enough. It has the following form: Sample S, which is too small, is taken from population P. Conclusion C is drawn about Population P based on S.

Hasty Generalization Example: I wouldn’t eat at that restaurant – the only time I ate there, my entrée was undercooked.

Hasty Generalization Example: Smith, who is from England, decides to attend graduate school at Ohio State University. He has never been to the US before. The day after he arrives, he is walking back from an orientation session and sees two white (albino) squirrels chasing each other around a tree. In his next letter home, he tells his family that American squirrels are white.

Hasty Generalization

Hasty Generalization

Hasty Generalization

Hasty Generalization

Hasty Generalization

Hasty Generalization

Faulty Causality These arguments confuse chronology with causation; one event can occur after another without being caused by it. Example: A year after the release of the violent shoot-’em-up video game Annihilator, incidents of school violence tripled – surely not a coincidence.

Faulty Causality

Faulty Causality

Questionable Cause This fallacy has the following general form: A and B are associated on a regular basis. Therefore A is the cause of B

Questionable Cause Joe gets a chain letter that threatens him with dire consequences if he breaks the chain. He laughs at it and throws it in the garbage. On his way to work he slips and breaks his leg. When he gets back from the hospital he sends out 200 copies of the chain letter, hoping to avoid further accidents.

Questionable Cause When investigating a small pond a group of graduate students found that there was a severe drop in the fish population. Further investigation revealed that the fishes' food supply had also been severely reduced. At first the students believed that the lack of food was killing the fish, but then they realized they had to find what was causing the decline in the food supply. The students suspected acid rain was the cause of both the reduction in the fish population as well as the food supply. However, the local business council insisted that it was just the lack of food that caused the reduction in the fish population. Most of the townspeople agreed with this conclusion since it seemed pretty obvious that a lack of food would cause fish to die.

Questionable Cause

Questionable Cause

Questionable Cause

Non Sequitur Latin for “It does not follow.” This is a statement that does not logically relate to what comes before it. An important logical step may be missing in such a claim. Example: If those protestors really loved their country, they wouldn’t question the government.

Non Sequitur

Non Sequitur

Non Sequitur

Equivocation This is a half-truth. A statement that is partially correct but that purposefully obscures the entire truth. Example: “I did not have sexual relations with that woman..” – President Bill Clinton.

Equivocation

Equivocation

Equivocation

Begging the Question This occurs when the writer simply restates the claim in a different way; such an argument is circular.

Begging the Question

Begging the Question Begging the Question is a fallacy in which the premises include the claim that the conclusion is true or assume (directly or indirectly) that the conclusion is true. This sort of "reasoning" typically has the following form. .

Begging the Question Premises in which the truth of the conclusion is claimed or the truth of the conclusion is assumed (either directly or indirectly). Claim C (the conclusion) is true.

Begging the Question Example: His lies are evident from the untruthful nature of his statements.

Begging the Question

Begging the Question

Faulty Analogy This is an inaccurate, inappropriate, or misleading comparison between two things. Example: Letting prisoners out on early release is like absolving them of their crimes.

Faulty Analogy

Faulty Analogy

Stacked Evidence This represents only one side of the issue, thus distorting the issue. Example: Cats are superior to dogs because they are cleaner, cuter, and more independent.

Stacked Evidence

Stacked Evidence

The Nizkor Project www.nizkor.org 2011 Some information and examples adapted from The Nizkor Project www.nizkor.org 2011