1.4: Logical Fallacies/Bias
As noted at the end of Section 1.3, using ethos, pathos, and logos in an argument does not mean that the argument made is necessarily a good one. In academia, especially, we care a lot about making our arguments logically sound; we care about logos. We seek to create work that is rooted in rational discourse. We seek to produce our own rational discourse. We value carefully researched, methodically crafted work. Thus, to be a strong academic writer, you should seek to avoid logical fallacies, which are flaws in reasoning.
Fallacy
Fallacy means false. Think of the concept of a logical fallacy as something that makes an argument problematic, open to attack, or weak. In academic discourse, logical fallacies are seen as failures, as things you will want to avoid.
Thinking about fallacies can be confusing because you see them all the time: in advertising, in conversation, in political discourse. Fallacies are everywhere. But as students, part of your job is to spend time identifying these fallacies in both your own writing as a way to avoid them and in others’ as a way to understand and dissect their argument.
Logical Fallacies – A Short List
- Generalization – A conclusion or judgment made from insufficient evidence. When one piece of evidence or information is used to make a broad conclusion or statement.
- Cherry picking – Picking and choosing only some of the available evidence in order to present only points most favourable to your point of view. If someone knowingly chooses certain (favourable) pieces of information and conveniently ignores less favourable information, then the argument is not supported by all of the available research.
- Straw Man – An oversimplification of an opposing perspective so that it becomes easy to attack. This is unfair and illogical because when one oversimplifies or inaccurately represents an argument and refutes that oversimplified version, one is not actually addressing the argument.
- Red Herring – Changing topics to avoid the point being discussed. This is an argument tactic in which one attempts to change the conversation, often by bringing up information that is not relevant to the claim or point being debated, in order to try to control the conversation. This can be a way to avoid having to address or answer the question at hand, and it harms the quality of an argument.
- Ad Hominem – It is a personal attack rather than a way of engaging with someone’s ideas. For example: “You are an idiot! That’s why you’re wrong!” This type of logical fallacy occurs when an arguer attacks or insults the person making opposing arguments instead of attacking the ideas, the logic, or the evidence within the opposing argument itself. It is a personal attack rather than a way of engaging with someone’s ideas.
- Ad Populum – A misused reference to popularly accepted values. For instance: “This is about freedom and righteousness, and if you believe in those things, then you should believe my argument.” This is an example of misused ethos – when the author is referencing the values that the audience cares about, so that they think only about the values and not about the content of the argument (or, likely, the fact that there is little intellectual substance in what is being said).
- Either/or – This is an argument that attempts to create a situation of absolutes with no options in between. For example: “Either we intervene or we are basically no better than the Nazis.” This thinking is fallacious because it assumes that there are only two options, with nothing in between.
- Slippery Slope – This is a fallacy that assumes that one thing is going to have a series of consequences or effects, often leading to a worst-case scenario. For example: “If we let this happen, then that will happen, and then the worst possible thing will happen.” It is false reasoning because 1) it’s impossible to predict the future, 2) it is illogical to suggest that one action will always necessarily lead to the worst possible outcome, and 3) it assumes a very specific chain of future events. This “if we let this happen, there will be some horrible end” is a misuse of cause/effect reasoning, often with some pathos (fear) sprinkled in.
When you are reading others’ arguments, see if any of their reasoning is actually one of these fallacies of logic.
Additional Resources
Understanding logical fallacies is important for clear thinking and good arguments. The Master List of Logical Fallacies list explains different types of misleading arguments that seem convincing but aren’t actually valid. Knowing these fallacies will help you make better arguments and spot mistakes in others’ reasoning.
As you read other arguments, consider HOW they are trying to convince you to their side. Have they used any of these fallacies, even on a small scale? How does that impact their argument? Additionally, when you draft ideas for your own arguments, test each of your reasons against these definitions: have you used any of these fallacies to build your reasoning? If so, keep revising your line of reasoning!
Bias
Bias is another part of writing to look out for. As humans, we all come with our biases based on our experiences, our beliefs, and our cultural and personal values. As such, our biases show up in our own writing and in the writing of others. They will also impact how we interact with a text.
When we write, our bias may influence how we write. For example, say you were writing an essay on the benefits of a particular diet, you may selectively choose information that supports this side only while ignoring the other side or research. This is often referred to as confirmation bias.
We can also notice this in what we read, as biased writing may selectively choose information to present or skew the data to show it in a certain way.
Bias also appears in our news as all news sources are looking for an audience, so those sources will build articles that appeal to a certain audience. Those who lean left will gravitate to left-leaning news sources, and those who lean right will gravitate to right-leaning news sources. This biased leaning may mean you don’t get the full picture of a story or get a biased picture of a story. This is why it is important to critique, and I would add that you also want to read widely and look at the whole picture to generate an opinion.
Additional Resources:
Read these articles to get a sense of some actual examples of the insidious affects of bias and how it can sway the reader’s opinion.
- The Associated Press. (2016, September 13). Sugar industry paid scientists for favourable research, documents reveal. CBC News.
- Nestle, M. (2018, October 31). Superfoods, food science, and the truth about what we eat. Vox.
- AllSides. (n.d.). Media bias chart.
Real-life examples:
- Sugar industry paid scientists for favourable research, documents reveal | CBC News
- I would love to grab an article about Purdue’s chart use at the beginning of OxyContin.
- Nutrition research is deeply biased by food companies. A new book explains why. | Vox
- Media Bias Chart | AllSides
Biased writing can lead to a skewed representation of the topic, misleading readers and undermining the credibility of the writing.
Attribution: The section on “1.4: Logical Fallacies/Biases” is adapted from A Guide to Rhetoric, Genre, and Success in First-Year Writing (The Interactive 2nd Edition) by Melanie Gagich & Emilie Zickel, licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License, except where otherwise noted.