Fallacies–Warning! Deceptive, Hateful Speech Coming Your Way
“BS-meter” by awp101, licensed under CC BY-NC-SA
A fallacy is an error in reasoning. It is a weak argument. To be more specific, a fallacy is an “argument” in which the premises given for the conclusion do not provide the needed degree of support. By becoming aware of the most common fallacies, you can avoid them in your own speech and detect them when others use them.
Fallacies undermine ethical communication.
- They distract us from the real issue.
- They “trick” us into faulty reasoning.
- They deceive us into believing bad conclusions.
- They keep us from having a good discussion of the topic at hand.
The venerable tradition of respectful argumentation, based on evidence, conducted with courtesy, and leading to the greater exposition of truth is a precious part of our heritage in this land of freedom.
James Shannon, the youngest college president in the US.
There are many fallacies. Here aresome of the most common ones that occur in persuasive and political types of speeches.
Red Herring
A red herring fallacy gets its name from the sport of fox hunting. In foxhunting, riders on horses follow their dogs who are chasing a fox. Riders sometimes keep a fish, –a red herring–in their saddlebags. If they are ahead in the chase, they can stop and drag the fish across the fox’s scent and make the trail go a different direction. When the opponents’ dogs encounter the fishy smell, it distracts them from their mission of fox chasing.
A red herring fallacy occurs when a speaker distracts listeners with sensational, irrelevant material. Sometimes it happens when the speaker changes the subject and sometimes it happens when the speaker brings up irrelevant information to the topic. Why is this a problem? It is a problem because it sidetracks the argument at hand. It seeks to “win” an argument by diversion. Take this example, “We admit that voting to support school choice is a popular measure. But we also urge you to note that there are so many issues on this ballot that the whole thing is getting ridiculous.” The argument at hand is whether or not to vote for school choice but the speaker distracts us by bringing up the point that there are too many issues on the ballot. It may be true that there are too many issues on the ballot, but that doesn’t make the school choice something we should vote for or not.
Slippery Slope
Oftentimes a speaker will argue one bad thing will result in many other bad things. This is done without proving these negative things will happen. A slippery slope causes the discussion to get off track. If you are not careful, you will find yourself arguing the ending claim and miss the real debate. Consider this example. In talking about gay marriage, Republican candidate for Governor, Rebecca Kleefisch went down a slippery slope that led to tables and dogs. “At what point are we going to OK marrying inanimate objects? Can I marry this table, or this, you know, clock? Can we marry dogs?”
When talking about the removal of public statues, President Trump went down a slippery slope. “This week it’s Robert E. Lee. I notice that Stonewall Jackson’s coming down. I wonder; is it George Washington next week, and is it, Thomas Jefferson, the week after? You know, you really do have to ask yourself, where does it stop?”
In speaking about the Iraq threat, President George W. Bush said, “I’m not willing to stake one American life on trusting Saddam Hussein. Failure to act would embolden other tyrants, allow terrorists access to new weapons and new resources, and make blackmail a permanent feature of world events. The United Nations would betray the purpose of its founding and prove irrelevant to the problems of our time. And through its inaction, the United States would resign itself to a future of fear.”
Discuss This
“Can people be persuaded?’ is a very different question from ‘Can arguments be won?’ People change their minds about things all the time, but I’m not sure that anybody ever wins an argument. Persuasion is not a zero-sum game. It occurs when somebody moves, even slightly, away from one position and toward another. It is entirely possible for two (or more) people to move closer to each other’s positions during an argument without either one being able to claim victory over the other.
But we like to win, and we hate to lose, so the fact that people don’t usually win arguments doesn’t stop most of us from trying. And we all think we know what winning means: It means crushing opponents and making them cry. It means humiliating them in front of a crowd. And it means displaying our power and our rightness for all the world to see and acknowledge. And this means that we often end up trying to win by employing rhetorical strategies that are fundamentally incapable of persuading anybody of anything. And that looks a lot like losing.”
Source: Austin, M. (2019). We must not be enemies: Restoring America’s civic tradition. Rowman & Littlefield.
- Would you agree, ” I’m not sure that anybody ever wins an argument?” Why or why not?
- How do fallacies interfere with the ability of one person to move closer to another?
- Do you agree “we often end up trying to win by employing rhetorical strategies that are fundamentally incapable of persuading anybody of anything?”
- When people resort to fallacies (attacks, diversions), is it “losing?”
Ad Hominem
We have a Congress
that spent money
like John Edwards
at a beauty shop.
Mike Huckabee (R)
Republican Presidential Candidate Debate
An Ad Hominem fallacy is one where the speaker attacks the person rather than the point. There are four major forms of attacking the person:
Ad hominem abusive: Instead of attacking a point, the argument attacks the person who made the assertion.
Democrat Alan Grayson described Republicans as “foot-dragging, knuckle-dragging Neanderthals who know nothing but ‘no.’”
Charley Reese from the Daily Iberian wrote, “That’s what abortion is – killing innocent humans for money. Abortionists are government licensed hit men.”
Ad hominem circumstantial: Instead of attacking the point, the person attacks the circumstances. They imply guilt by association.
Sara Palin, Republican Vice Presidential hopeful implied that Barak Obama was friends with terrorists. “Our opponent though is someone who sees America, it seems, as being so imperfect that he’s palling around with terrorists who would target their own country.”
Ad hominem tu quoque: The attacker suggests the person is a hypocrite and because they are a hypocrite, you can’t believe any point they make.
When Al Gore was traveling to speaking engagement on the topic of global warming, he was criticized for traveling by private jet. As President Obama was talking about gun control, speakers pointed out he was surrounded by secret service agents with guns. The argument itself should be discussed–gun control, climate change–the fact that the speaker may or may not be a hypocrite doesn’t mean the issue is right or wrong.
Poisoning the well: The speaker attacks the credibility of a person before they speak to bias listeners against the speaker. This fallacy is based on the belief that the enemy used to put tainted meat down into the town well so all the water that would come out of the well would be tainted and make people sick. The idea is that if a speaker taints a person’s credibility, then everything that comes out of their mouth is something harmful. Just because a person had poor judgment in one situation, doesn’t mean that they are incorrectly handling the topic at hand.
For a great overview of Ad Hominem, watch Ad Hominem (Appeal to personal attack) (2 mins) on YouTube
Video source: AMOR. (2012, February 21). Ad Hominem (Appeal to personal attack) [Video]. YouTube. https://youtu.be/FD50OTR3arY
Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc
Talking to cashiers at fast-food restaurants causes obesity
(the more I talk to fast food cashiers, the heavier I get).
Author unknown
The fallacy here is the assumption that one thing caused another without proof of the link. When you study statistics, you will learn the phrase “correlation does not mean causation” which means just because two things seem to happen together, doesn’t mean that the one actually caused the other. Post hoc ergo propter hoc = after this therefore because of this and is a fallacy of false cause. Just because two things are consecutive, doesn’t mean that one caused the other. I do still believe that it rains every time I wash my car.
Sports fans have a lot of these– “my team lost Friday because I forgot to wear my lucky hat.”
Autism in children is often detected at the same ages as they are getting immunizations leading to the incorrect assumption that one causes the other. “Just the other day, two years old, two and a half years old, a child, a beautiful child went to have the vaccine, and came back, and a week later got a tremendous fever, got very, very sick, now is autistic.” Donald Trump
That’s Latin for ’I’m old enough I should see a propterhoctologist”, right?
Mark Miller.
Faulty Analogy
Comparing things that are dissimilar in some important way
Former Arkansas Governor, Mike Huckabee (R) said at a Freedom Summit that he is beginning to believe there’s “More freedom in North Korea sometimes than there is in the United States. When I go to the airport, I have to get in the surrender position. People put hands all over me. And I have to provide a photo ID in a couple of different forms and prove that I really am not going to terrorize the airplane. But if I want to go vote, I don’t need a thing.” He was arguing why there needs to be government-required identification when voting but this comparison of airport inspection to a country with severe human rights violations is distracting and not a fair analogy.
“You know Obamacare is really I think the worst thing that has happened in this nation since slavery. And it is in a way, it is slavery in a way, because it is making all of us subservient to the government, and it was never about health care. It was about control.” Political candidate Ben Carson (R) at Values Voter Summit in Washington, D.C.
What do you think? Good metaphor or faulty analogy?
I grew up castrating hogs on an Iowa farm,
so when I come to Washington,
I’ll know how to cut pork.
Joni Ernst (R-IA)
Improperly used comparisons can be a problem. Andina Wise in an opinion piece in Scientific American highlights that discussing military metaphors to fight COVID-19 undermines the practice of medicine. She highlights the wartime rhetoric using words that: Doctors are fighting on the frontlines without sufficient ammunition. They are battling the enemy and doctors from every specialty have been redeployed. They are at war. She warns that using wartime rhetoric sends a “precarious message.”.
To adopt a wartime mentality is fundamentally to allow for an all-bets-are-off, anything-goes approach to emerging victorious. And while there may very well be a time for slapdash tactics in the course of weaponized encounters on the physical battlefield, this is never how one should endeavor to practice medicine.
Watch False analogies about cupcakes and obesity (5 mins) on YouTube, it includes some powerful and relevant examples of false analogies.
Video source: Cook, J. (2020, June 9). False analogies about cupcakes and obesity [Video]. YouTube. https://youtu.be/_1jMqW9HHWs
Non sequitur
Non sequitur is reasoning in which principles and observations are unrelated to each other or to the conclusion drawn. Literally means “it does not follow.” If I mix red paint and green paint will never make blue paint, that’s not logical. Similarly, a non sequitur is not a logical conclusion of the ideas they are combining.
Snow in 50 states does not mean climate change is fake.
It is not a logical conclusion
“The liberals, the environmentalists, extremists, the Al Gores of the world
were wrong on science – and today we know it…
I’ve got a scoop shovel for you if you want to come any place
in the 50 states in America —
for the first time in the history of keeping records,
there’s snowfall on the ground in all 50 states.
It’s tough to make an argument
when the evidence is all around us
with the snowy white wonder and a crystal cathedral.”
Steve Kin, Republican from Iowa speaking at CPAC
Is Veggie Pizza Un-manly?
Serving Up a Non-Sequitur
The more toppings a man has on his pizza,
I believe the more manly he is.
A manly man doesn’t want it piled high with vegetables.
He would call that a sissy pizza.
Herman Cain, former presidential nominee
and CEO of Godfather’s Pizza
Hasty generalization
Drawing conclusions based on insufficient or non-representative observations.
People often commit hasty generalizations because of bias or prejudice. For example, someone who is a sexist might conclude that all women are unfit to fly jet fighters because one woman crashed one. People also commonly commit hasty generalizations because of laziness or sloppiness. It is very easy to simply leap to a conclusion and much harder to gather an adequate sample and draw a justified conclusion. Thus, avoiding this fallacy requires minimizing the influence of bias and taking care to select a sample that is large enough. Nizkor Project
Steve King assumes Mexicans are drug dealers: “For everyone who’s a valedictorian, there’s another 100 out there who weigh 130 pounds — and they’ve got calves the size of cantaloupes because they’re hauling 75 pounds of marijuana across the desert.” Representative Steve King, a Republican from Iowa making assumptions about immigrants from Mexico.
Herman Cain assumes Muslims are militants: “I would not be comfortable [with a Muslim in my administration] because you have peaceful Muslims and then you have militant Muslims, those that are trying to kill us. And so when I said I wouldn’t be comfortable, I was thinking about the ones that are trying to kill us, number one. Secondly, yes, I do not believe in sharia law in American courts. I believe in American laws in American courts. Period. There have been instances in New Jersey. There was an instance in Oklahoma where Muslims did try to influence court decisions with sharia law. I was simply saying very emphatically American laws in American courts.” Republican Tea Party Candidate, Herman Cain.
Either-or-thinking (Also Called False Dilemma)
Framing choices so that listeners think they have only two options and one of them is obviously preferred. I saw someone with a shirt on the other day that said, “America, love it or leave it.” It set up only two options. What if someone mostly loves America, but doesn’t like the health care system? What if they like America, but see that there is unfair distribution of wealth? What if they think another country has a better political system? Setting it up like there are only two choices when clearly most things have many shades of gray is creating a false dilemma.
”So, it is with conviction that I support this resolution as being in the best interests of our nation. A vote for it is not a vote to rush to war; it is a vote that puts awesome responsibility in the hands of our President and we say to him – use these powers wisely and as a last resort. And it is a vote that says clearly to Saddam Hussein – this is your last chance – disarm or be disarmed.” Hillary Clinton (D)
“Every nation, in every region, now has a decision to make. Either you are with us, or you are with the terrorists.” George W. Bush (R) statement to Congress after 9/11.
We can either tax and regulate cannabis for adult use, reduce violence, and enrich our state, or we can continue a policy that enriches the cartels and has always has a racially biased pattern of enforcement. Ben Jealous candidate during a Democratic primary for Governor
“And the reason is because there really are only two alternatives here. Either the issue of Iran obtaining a nuclear weapon is resolved diplomatically through a negotiation or it’s resolved through a force, through war.” Barack Obama (D)
Strawman
“Another well known, and much used, device
is to misrepresent my position
and attack things I have never said.”
Rachel Carson
Strawman fallacy is where a speaker belittles or trivializes an argument to refute them easily. The speaker cannot defeat the real issue so they frame the issue as silly –they make a straw doll–a fake argument that looks a little like the real one that is easily defeated. Often the issue they attack has a semblance of the real issue but is different in significant ways.
Consider this example, President Obama introduced a provision that would allow Medicare to pay for counseling on end-of-life issues if the patient asked for it. Doctors could counsel patients about end-of-life care issues such as living wills and hospice care. Senator Chuck Grassley, Iowa Republican said in a town hall meeting. “In the House bill, there is counseling for end of life. You have every right to fear. You shouldn’t have counseling at the end of life, you should have done that 20 years before. Should not have a government-run plan to decide when to pull the plug on grandma.” Notice what happened, he changed counseling about end-of-life issues into pulling the plug on grandma. In this example, Grassly created the issue into something that sounds ridiculous and is easy to defeat.
Can You Find All the Fallacies?
We’ve been battling this socialist health care, the nationalization of health care, that is going to absolutely kill senior citizens. They’ll put them on lists and force them to die early because they won’t get the treatment as early as they need. […] I would rather stop this socialization of health care because once the government pays for your health care, they have every right to tell you what you eat, what you drink, how you exercise, where you live. […] But if we’re going to pay 700 million dollars like we voted last Friday to put condoms on wild horses, and I know it just says an un-permanent enhanced contraception whatever the heck that is. I guess it follows that they’re eventually get around to doing it to us. This is a statement by Representative Louie Gohmert (R-TX) from Texas in an interview with Alex Jones.
- “Socialist health care” is a strawman
- “Kill senior citizens” and “force them to die early” is a slippery slope and a Post hoc ergo propter hoc.
- “One the government pays for your healthcare….tell you…eat, drink…live” is a Post hoc ergo propter hoc.
- “Condoms on wild horses” is a red herring and a strawman
- “They will get around to doing that to us” is a slippery slope and post hoc
Key Takeaways
Remember This!
- A fallacy is a weak argument in which the premises given do not provide needed support–it is a weak argument
- Red herring fallacy occurs when a speaker distracts listeners with sensational, irrelevant material.
- Slippery slope fallacy occurs when the speaker argues that one bad thing will result in many other bad things. This is done without proving that these negative things will happen.
- Ad Hominem fallacy here the speaker attacks the person rather than the point.
- A post hoc ero propter hoc fallacy is the assumption that one thing caused another without proof of the link.
- A faulty analogy is comparing things that are dissimilar in some important way.
- Non sequitur fallacy is reasoning in which principles and observations are unrelated to each other or to the conclusion drawn.
- Hasty generalization is drawing conclusions based on insufficient or non-representative observations.
- Either-or-thinking is framing choices so that listeners think they have only two options and one of them is obviously preferred.
- Strawman fallacy is where a speaker belittles or trivializes an argument to refute them easily
Attribution & References
Except where otherwise noted, this chapter is adapted from “Fallacies–Warning! Deceptive, Hateful Speech Coming Your Way” In Advanced Public Speaking by Lynn Meade, licensed under CC BY 4.0.
References
Ambinder, M. (2009, July 10). “Pals around with terrorist”: Palin wasn’t that rogue after all. The Atlantic. https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2009/07/-pals-around-with-terrorists-palin-wasnt-that-rogue-after-all/21044/
Arp, R., Barbone, S., and Brice, M. (2018). Bad Arguments: 100 of the most important fallacies in western philosophy. John Wiley and Sons. http://DOI:10.1002/9781119165811
ATV Safety-Ted Dinosaur with Feathers (2017). U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission. https://hdl.loc.gov/loc.gdc/gdclccn.2019666541
Austin, M. (2019). We must not be enemies: Restoring America’s civic tradition. Rowman & Littlefield.
Bluedorn, H. (2000). Red herring again. Fallacy Detective. http://www.fallacydetective.com/news/read/red-herring-again
Bolano, A. (2020, June 09). 6 false Dichotomy examples & how to counter them. https://www.developgoodhabits.com/false-dichotomy/
Bruckbaker, B. (2006), Kerry remark draws sharp criticism. Washington Post. https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/business/technology/2006/10/31/kerry-remark-draws-sharp-criticism/e87244fd-e349-4943-82cf-0b461c4eb0d1/
Bush, G.W. (2002). President Bush’s Speech on the Use of Force. https://www.nytimes.com/2002/10/08/national/president-bushs-speech-on-the-use-of-force.html
Bush, G. W. (2001, Sept 20). President Bush Addresses the Nation. https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/nation/specials/attacked/transcripts/bushaddress_092001.html
Bush, G. W. (August 28, 2007) President Bush Addresses the 89th Annual National Convention of the American Legion http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2007/08/20070828-2.html
Cillizza, C. (2016). The remarkable thing about Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton’s incredibly high negatives: Race to the bottom, here we come!. Washington: WP Company LLC d/b/a The Washington Post. https://search.proquest.com/blogs,-podcasts,-websites/remarkable-thing-about-donald-trump-hillary/docview/1782379172/se-2?accountid=8361
Clinton. H. (2002). Clinton on Iraqi War Resolution. http://www.cs.cornell.edu/people/eric/Activism/hillary-iraq.htm
CNN (2000, Aug 15 ). U.S. Representative Harold Ford delivers remarks at Democratic National Convention http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2000/conventions/democratic/transcripts/u110815.html
Elbaum, D. (2018). When it is Okay to Evoke Hitler and the Nazis. AJC Global Voice. https://www.ajc.org/news/when-is-it-okay-to-evoke-hitler-and-the-nazis
Fallacy Files (n.d.). http://www.fallacyfiles.org/redherrf.html
Fang, L. (2009, July 27). Gohmert trades ideas with conspiracy theorist, says Obama health plan will ‘absolutely kill senior citizens’. https://archive.thinkprogress.org/gohmert-trades-ideas-with-conspiracy-theorist-says-obama-health-plan-will-absolutely-kill-senior-d6adf6d0e1c4/
Foxnews. (2011, September 22). Fox News-Google GOP Debate. https://www.foxnews.com/tech/fox-news-and-google-to-host-gop-presidential-debate-on-sept-22
Fuller, M. (2013, August 13 ). Ten most Quotable members of Congress. Roll Call. https://www.rollcall.com/news/10-most-quotable-members-of-congress
Gill, T. (2014). Michelle Guffar robocall tries to rally opposition to Fayetteville’s civil rights proposal. Fayetteville Flyer. https://www.fayettevilleflyer.com/2014/08/18/michelle-duggar-robocall-tries-to-rally-opposition-to-fayettevilles-anti-discrimination-proposal/
Kiff, S. (2016). No, Donald Trump, abortions do not happen at 9 months pregnant. Vox. https://www.vox.com/2016/10/19/13341532/abortion-9-months-trump
Lindsey, D. (n.d). A list Of fallacious arguments http://www.don-lindsay-archive.org/skeptic/arguments.html#hominem
Logical Fallacies and the Art of Debate (n.d.). http://www.csun.edu/~dgw61315/fallacies.html#Non%20sequitur
Page, C. (1995). Newt on ditches and dirty britches. Chicago Tribune. https://www.chicagotribune.com/news/ct-xpm-1995-01-22-9501210248-story.html
Politifact. (2011) Herman Cain said government bureaucrats will determine when you get a CAT scan once the new health care law begins. politifact.com/factchecks/2011/sep/27/herman-cain/herman-cain-said-government-bureaucrats-will-deter/
Hughs newsletter from a college president (n.d). https://streetcarsuburbs.news/hughs-news-letter-from-a-college-president/
Human Rights Campaign, (n.d). Rick Santorum: Compares same-sex marriage to 9/11. https://www.hrc.org/resources/2016republicanfacts-rick-santorum
Kornacki, S. (2010). Steve King: Snowfall proves Al Gore wrong. Salon. https://www.salon.com/2010/02/19/king_on_global_warming/
Lall, R.R. (2020). John Bolton and the ‘post hoc ergo propter hoc fallacy about Iran. https://rashmee.medium.com/john-bolton-and-the-post-hoc-ergo-propter-hoc-fallacy-about-iran-53fc13ef557d
Molloy, D. (2017, Nov 24). Why does everyone keep making Nazi comparisons? https://www.bbc.com/news/world-39266863
Montopoli, B. (2009, August 12). Grassley warns of the government pulling the plug “on grandma.” CBS News. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/grassley-warns-of-government-pulling-plug-on-grandma/
NPR. (2017, August 16). Does Trump’s slippery slope argument about Confederate
statues have merit? National Public Radio.
https://www.npr.org/2017/08/16/543973293/does-trumps-slippery-slope-argument-about-confederate-statues-have-merit
The Nizkor Project Fallacies. (n.d.). http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/index.html#index
O’Hair, D. Stewart, R. & Rubenstein, H. (2004). A Speaker’s Guidebook Text and Reference Second Edition. Bedford.
Richards, A. (July 19, 1988). Democratic National Convention Keynote Address retrieved http://www.americanrhetoric.com/speeches/annrichards1988dnc.htm
Roberts, D. (2015). Carly Fiorina did a 4-minute riff on climate change. Everything she said was wrong. https://www.vox.com/2015/8/21/9186313/carly-fiorina-climate-wrong
Some Common Fallacies. (n.d.) http://www.ucs.louisiana.edu/~kak7409/Fallacies.html
Sprague, J. & Stuart, D. (2005). A Speakers Handbook. Thomas Wadsworth.
Steven’s guide to logical fallacies. (n.d.). http://www.onegoodmove.org/fallacy/toc.htm
Szoldra, P. (2014). Mike Huckabee: North Korea sometimes has more freedom than the US. Business Insider. https://www.businessinsider.com/mike-huckabee-north-korea-2014-4
Tedesco, J. C., & Dunn, S. W. (2019). Political Advertising in the 2016 U.S. Presidential Election: Ad Hominem Ad Nauseam. American Behavioral Scientist, 63(7), 935–947. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764218756919
Valenzano, J. M, Kuypers, J.A., Braden, S. W. (2019) The Speaker: The tradition and practice of public speaking (4th edition): Fountainhead Press.
Washington Post (2012). Republican Primary Debate, Reagan Library, Simi Valley California. https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/2012-presidential-debates/republican-primary-debate-september-7-2011/
Washington Post (2013). Ben Carson: Obamacare worst think since slavery https://www.washingtonpost.com/video/politics/carson-obamacare-is-worst-thing–since-slavery/2013/10/11/e40289d6-328d-11e3-89ae-16e186e117d8_video.html
Wise, A. (2020, April 17). Military metaphors distort the reality of COVID-19. Scientific American. https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/military-metaphors-distort-the-reality-of-covid-19/
YourDictionary. Fallacy Examples. https://examples.yourdictionary.com/straw-man-fallacy-examples.html
