Logical Fallacy: Argument Writing A fallacy is an incorrect argument in logic and rhetoric which undermines an argument's logical validity or more generally an argument's logical soundness. Fallacies are either formal fallacies or informal fallacies. A non sequitur (Latin for "it does not follow"), in formal logic, is an invalid argument – an argument whose conclusion does not follow from its premises.

Logical Fallacy: Formal Anecdotal fallacy- a story Appeal to Probability- this “might” happen Argument from Fallacy- if the argument is wrong the conclusion is also wrong. (e.g. if oranges are turquoise, they must be ready to eat) False Cause- Citing a false cause to explain a situation. Either Or- it’s one or the other, no in between.

Logical Fallacy: Informal Wrong Direction: Cause and Effect are reversed. (e.g. Children that watch a lot of TV are the most violent. Clearly, TV makes children more violent.) Moral High Ground: one assumes a "holier-than-thou" attitude in an attempt to make oneself look good to win an argument. (e.g. “because it’s wrong”- you can’t necessarily say what someone else’s morals are.) Intentionally Fallacy-the insistence that the ultimate meaning of an expression must be consistent with the intention of the person from whom the communication originated (e.g. a work of fiction that is widely received as a blatant allegory must necessarily not be regarded as such if the author intended it not to be so… DO NOT USE SATIRE OR OPINION AS EVIDENCE) Begging the question- The opinion to be proved is framed like it already has been proved.

Logical Fallacy: Generalizations Cherry Picking-act of pointing at individual cases or data that seem to confirm a particular position, while ignoring a significant portion of related cases or data that may contradict that position False Analogy-an argument by analogy in which the analogy is poorly suited. Hasty Generalization-(fallacy of insufficient statistics, fallacy of insufficient sample, fallacy of the lonely fact, leaping to a conclusion, hasty induction, secundum quid, converse accident) – basing a broad conclusion on a small sample

Examples-why is the logic false? Global Warming does not exist because it is not getting hotter. Begging the question, statement is stated like a fact, not an opinion The increase in global warming in the past decade is because more teenagers are using hair spray. False cause: do you have sufficient (more than one resource that says that) proof that states it’s because of hair spray? Using Hairspray everyday is like using a nuclear weapon. False analogy: even if harispray was the cause of global warming, a nuclear weapon is immediate and deadly.

Examples-why is the logic false? It is warmer this year than it was last year, therefore global warming is accelerating. Hasty Generalization: Due to that one fact, global warming is accelerating. We should stop using hair spray because it is snowing in New York. Non Sequitur: The logic does not follow, one does not equate to the other thing.

Avoiding Fallacy: While the reader will give you the benefit of the doubt, if they do not accept the premise your entire paper is a waste. Make sure you explain your thinking in detail Keep it factual, don’t just give your opinion. Begin with the things that are simplest and easiest to understand, and then ascend to knowledge of the more complex. Do not use All, Always, Never, forever, Not ever, as they lead to false conclusions by over simplifying and generalizing.

Activity-Walk through logic THESIS: (what you think should be done) Main Point: A major problem in Hawaii is homelessness. Evidence: “Homeless advocates have said a lack of affordable housing in the islands remains the single biggest reason so many find themselves on the streets” (HNN staff). Evidence: “The state passed tough criminal laws aimed at ridding sidewalks, streets and parks of the homeless. At the same time, the city sent teams of social workers out to help the homeless move into shelters. And the tourist industry put up money to cover airfare for homeless people who had come from the mainland and who said they were ready to go home” (Nagourney). Analysis: Explain the evidence and why it proves the main point and thesis.

Black mirror: Determine what the writer is saying about our society and social media. Is this a just treatment for someone who committed her crime? Explain. How would you argue that the opposite of what you believe? Explain.