1.3 Understanding Fallacies of Argumentation
Let’s engage in the descriptions of these main “defective” premises that can lead manipulators to manipulate and the manipulated audiences to be manipulated. Below is a list of the 14 most common types of fallacies you’ll encounter as a writer:
Hasty Generalization | Post Hoc (False Cause) | Red Herring | Bandwagon Appeal | Straw Man | Ad Hominem | Either/Or (False Dilemma) | Appeal to Authority | Appeal to Pity | Appeal to Force | Begging the Question | Non Sequitur | False Analogy | Circular Argument
Explanation: This fallacy occurs when someone makes a broad statement based on insufficient evidence. It often stems from limited data or a single experience.
Example: A student fails one history quiz and immediately claims, “I’m horrible at history and will never understand it.”
Now ask yourself, “Is this conclusion based on enough evidence?”
Explanation: This fallacy assumes that just because one event occurred before another, the first event must have caused the second.
Example: A student wears a certain pair of shoes while getting an A on their science test. They decide those shoes are their “lucky shoes” and must be worn during exams.
Now let’s think of alternative explanations for a supposed cause-and-effect relationship and identify the elements of true causation versus mere correlation.
Explanation: This fallacy distracts from the main issue by introducing an unrelated or tangential topic.
Example: A student complains that homework should be eliminated, but when pressed for reasons, he says, “Well, the school lunch is bad, too!”
Think about it. How many times have you seen an argument go off-topic? What was needed to get the discussion back to the center of the original question?
Explanation: This fallacy suggests that something must be good or correct just because many people believe in it or do it.
Example: A student claims she must get a new phone because “Everyone in class has one!”
Does popularity make something right or logical? What are the actual merits of choice?
Deeper Explanation: This fallacy misrepresents an opposing argument to make it easier to attack.
Example: During a classroom debate about adding school uniforms, one student argues, “You just want everyone to be miserable!” instead of engaging with the actual argument.
Always rephrase arguments accurately before responding, ensuring they engage in the actual position you are defending.
Explanation: This fallacy attacks the person making an argument rather than addressing the argument itself.
Example: A student dismisses a classmate’s argument by saying, “You don’t know anything about this topic; you’re just a kid.”
Always focus on the reasoning behind an argument rather than the personal characteristics of those formulating it.
Explanation: This fallacy presents only two possible options when more exist.
Example: A student says, “Either we cancel all tests, or we students will be stressed forever!”
Let’s recognize when more possibilities exist and encourage brainstorming multiple alternatives.
Explanation: This fallacy relies on the opinion of a figure of authority, without considering actual evidence.
Example: “This book is the best because my favourite celebrity said so.”
Always ask yourself, “Does this authority figure have actual expertise in the subject?”. And then verify the celebrity or authority’s claims with evidence.
Explanation: This fallacy tries to win an argument by playing on emotions rather than using logic.
Example: A student argues that they should be class president because -they argue- “I’ve had a tough year, so you should vote for me.”
That is why we need to separate emotional pleas from actual reasoning when making decisions.
Explanation: This fallacy attempts to win an argument by using threats or intimidation.
Example: A student tells the members of his study group, “If you don’t support my idea, I’ll make sure you don’t get credit for this project.”
We need to recognize when persuasion shifts from reasoning to coercion, and always use respectful debate techniques.
Deeper Explanation: This fallacy assumes the very point that needs to be proven.
Example: “This book is a classic because it’s very popular and widely read.”
We must always analyze whether a claim provides actual evidence or just restates an assumption.
Explanation: From the Latin meaning “it does not follow”, this fallacy occurs when a conclusion does not logically follow from the premises.
Example: “You don’t want to volunteer at the fundraiser? Guess you don’t care about the school at all!”
We should always identify when connections between ideas are missing and learn to always ask ourselves, “Does this conclusion actually follow logically?”
Explanation: This fallacy compares two things that aren’t truly alike.
Example: “Our school should be run like a business because businesses are efficient.”
We must evaluate whether two items being compared share meaningful similarities or if the comparison is misleading.
Explanation: A circular argument (also called petitio principii) occurs when the premise of an argument assumes the truth of the conclusion, rather than providing evidence to support it. In essence, it’s like trying to prove something by stating it as a fact in the first place.
Example: A student says, “God exists because the Bible says so, and the Bible is true because it is the word of God.”
This Student assumes the truth of God’s existence (which is the conclusion they want to arrive at) by declaring that the Bible is inspired by God (a premise that relies on the conclusion). The problem is that the argument does not offer independent evidence that supports the claim that God exists.
