3. Informal Fallacies

Love is a Fallacy

by Max Shulman

Cool was I and logical. Keen, calculating, perspicacious, acute, and astute–I was all of these. My brain was as powerful as a dynamo, as precise as a chemist’s scales, as penetrating as a scalpel. And–think of it!–I was only eighteen.

It is not often that one so young has such a giant intellect. Take, for example, Petey Bellows, my roommate at the university. Same age, same background, but dumb as an ok. A nice enough fellow, you understand, but nothing upstairs. Emotional type. Unstable. Impressionable. Worst of all, a faddist. Fads, I submit, are the very negation of reason. To be swept up in every new craze that comes along, to surrender yourself to idiocy just because everybody else is doing it–this, to me, is the acme of mindlessness. Not, however, to Petey.

One afternoon I found Petey lying on his bed with an expression of such distress on his face that I immediately diagnosed appendicitis. “Don’t move,” I said. “Don’t take a laxative. I’ll get a doctor.”
“Raccoon,” he mumbled thickly.

“Raccoon?” I said, pausing in my flight.

“I want a raccoon coat,” he wailed.

I perceived that his trouble was not physical, but mental. “Why do you want a raccoon coat?”

“I should have known it,” he cried, pounding his temples. “I should have known they’d come back when the Charleston came back. Like a fool I spent all my money for textbooks, and now I can’t get a raccoon coat.”

“Can you mean,” I said incredulously, “that people are actually wearing raccoon coats again?”
“All the Big Men on Campus are wearing them. Where’ve you been?”

“In the library,” I said, naming a place not frequented by Big Men on Campus.
He leaped from the bed and paced the room. “I’ve got to have a raccoon coat,” he said passionately. “I’ve got to!”

“Petey, why? Look at it rationally. Raccoon coats are unsanitary. They shed. They smell bad. They weigh too much. They’re unsightly. They—”

“You don’t understand,” he interrupted impatiently. “It’s the thing to do. Don’t you want to be in the swim?”

“No,” I said truthfully.

“Well, I do,” he declared. “I’d give anything for a raccoon coat. Anything!”
My brain, that precision instrument, slipped into high gear. “Anything?” I asked, looking at him narrowly.

“Anything,” he affirmed in ringing tones.

I stroked my chin thoughtfully. It so happened that I knew where to get my hands on a raccoon coat. My father had had one in his undergraduate days; it lay now in a trunk in the attic back home. It also happened that Petey had something I wanted. He didn’t have it exactly, but at least he had first rights on it. I refer to his girl, Polly Espy.

I had long coveted Polly Espy. Let me emphasize that my desire for this young woman was not emotional in nature. She was, to be sure, a girl who excited the emotions, but I was not one to let my heart rule my head.

I wanted Polly for a shrewdly calculated, entirely cerebral reason.

I was a freshman in law school. In a few years I would be out in practice. I was well aware of the importance of the right kind of wife in furthering a lawyer’s career. The successful lawyers I had observed were, almost without exception, married to beautiful, gracious, intelligent women. With one omission, Polly fitted these specifications perfectly.

Beautiful she was. She was not yet of pin-up proportions, but I felt sure that time would supply the lack. She already had the makings. Gracious she was. By gracious I mean full of graces. She had an erectness of carraige, an ease of bearing, a poise that clearly indicated the best of breeding. At table her manners were exquisite. I had seen her at the Kozy Kampus Korner eating the specialty of the house–a sandwich that contained scraps of pot roast, gravy, chopped nuts, and a dipper of sauerkraut–without even getting her fingers moist.
Intelligent she was not. In fact, she veered in the opposite direction. But I believed that under my guidance she would smarten up. At any rate, it was worth a try. It is, after all, easier to make a beautiful dumb girl smart than to make an ugly smart girl beautiful.

“Petey,” I said, “are you in love with Polly Espy?”

“I think she’s a keen kid,” he replied, “but I don’t know if you’d call it love. Why?”

“Do you,” I asked, “have any kind of formal arrangement with her? I mean are you going steady or anything like that?”

“No. We see each other quite a bit, but we both have other dates. Why?”
“Is there,” I asked, “any other man for whom she has a particular fondness?”

“Not that I know of. Why?” I nodded with satisfaction. “In other words, if you were out of the picture, the field would be open. Is that right?”

“I guess so. What are you getting at?”

“Nothing, nothing,” I said innocently, and took my suitcase out of the closet.

“Where are you going?” asked Petey.

“Home for the weekend.” I threw a few things into the bag.

“Listen,” he said, clutching my arm eagerly, “while you’re home, you couldn’t get some money from your old man, could you, and lend it to me so I can buy a raccoon coat?”

“I may do better than that,” I said with a mysterious wink and closed my bag and left.

“Look,” I said to Petey when I got back Monday morning. I threw open the suitcase and revealed the huge, hairy, gamy object that my father had worn in his Stutz Bearcat in 1925.

“Holy Toledo!” said Peter reverently. He plunged his hands into the raccoon coat and then his face. “Holy Toledo!” he repeated fifteen or twenty times.

“Would you like it?” I asked.

“Oh yes!” he cried, clutching the greasy pelt to him. Then a canny look came into his eyes. “What do you want for it?”

“Your girl,” I said, mincing no words.
“Polly?” he asked in a horrified whisper. “You want Polly?”

“That’s right.”

He flung the coat from him. “Never,” he said stoutly.

I shrugged. “Okay. If you don’t want the be in the swim, I guess it’s your business.”

I sat down in a chair and pretended to read a book, but out of the corner of my eye I kept watching Petey. He was a torn man. First he looked at the coat with the expression of a waif at a bakery window. Then he turned away and set his jaw resolutely. Then he looked back at the coat, with even more longing in his face. Then he turned away, but with not so much resolution this time. Back and forth his head swiveled, desire waxing, resolution waning. Finally, he didn’t turn away at all; he just stood and stared with mad lust at the coat.

“It isn’t as though I was in love with Polly,” he said thickly. “Or going steady or anything like that.”

“That’s right,” I murmured.

“What’s Polly to me, or me to Polly?”

“Not a thing,” said I.

“It’s just been a casual kick–just a few laughs, that’s all.”

“Try on the coat,” said I.

He complied. The coat bunched high over his ears and dropped all the way down to his shoe tops. He looked like a mound of dead raccoons. “Fits fine,” he said happily.

“Is it a deal?” I asked, extending my hand.

He swallowed. “It’s a deal,” he said and shook my hand.

I had my first date with Polly the following evening. This was in the nature of a survey; I wanted to find out just how much work I had to do to get her mind up to the standard I required. I took her first to dinner.

“Gee, that was a delish dinner,” she said as we left the restaurant. Then I took her to a movie. “Gee, that was a marvy movie,” she said as we left the theater. And then I took her home. “Gee, I had a sensaysh time,” she said as she bade me goodnight.

I went back to my room with a heavy heart. I had gravely underestimated the size of my task. This girl’s lack of information was terrifying. Nor would it be enough merely to supply her with information. First she had to be taught to think. This loomed as a project of no small dimensions, and at first I was tempted to give her back to Petey. But then I got to thinking about her abundant physical charms and about the way she entered a room and the way she handled a knife and fork, and I decided to make an effort.

I went about it, as in all things, systematically. I gave her a course in logic. It happened that I, as a law student, was taking a course in logic myself, so I had all the facts at my fingertips.

“Polly,” I said to her when I picked her up on our next date, “tonight we are going over to the Knoll and talk.”

“Oo, terrif,” she replied. One thing I will say for this girl: You would go far to find another so agreeable.
We went to the Knoll, the campus trysting place, and we sat down under an oak, and she looked at me expectantly: “What are we going to talk about?” she asked.

“Logic.”

She thought this over for a minute and decided she liked it. “Magnif,” she said.

“Logic,” I said, clearing my throat, “is the science of thinking. Before we can think correctly, we must first learn to recognize the common fallacies of logic. These we will take up tonight.”

“Wow-dow!” she cried, clapping her hands delightedly.

I winced, but went bravely on. “First let us examine the fallacy called Dicto Simpliciter.”

“By all means,” she urged, batting her eyelashes eagerly.

“Dicto Simpliciter means an argument based on an unqualified generalization. For example: Exercise is good. Therefore everybody should exercise.”

“I agree,” said Polly earnestly. “I mean exercise is wonderful. I mean it builds the body and everything.”

“Polly,” I said gently, “the argument is a fallacy. Exercise is good is an unqualified generalization. For instance, if you have heart disease, exercise is bad, not good. Many people are ordered by their doctors not to exercise. You must qualify the generalization. You must say exercise is usually good, or exercise is good for most people. Otherwise you have committed a Dicto Simpliciter. Do you see?”

“No,” she confessed. “But this is marvy. Do more! Do more!”

“It will be better if you stop tugging at my sleeve,” I told her, and when she desisted, I continued. “Next we take up a fallacy called Hasty Generalization. Listen carefully: You can’t speak French. I can’t speak French. Petey Bellows can’t speak French. I must therefore conclude that nobody at the University of Minnesota can speak French.”

“Really?” said Polly, amazed. “Nobody?”

I hid my exasperation. “Polly, it’s a fallacy. The generalization is reached too hastily. There are too few instances to support such a conclusion.”

“Know any more fallacies?” she asked breathlessly. “This is more fun than dancing even.”
I fought off a wave of despair. I was getting nowhere with this girl, absolutely nowhere. Still, I am nothing if not persistant. I continued.

“Next comes Post Hoc. Listen to this: Let’s not take Bill on our picnic. Everytime we take him out with us, it rains.”

“I know somebody just like that,” she exclaimed. “A girl back home–Eula Becker, her name is. It never fails. Every single time we take her on a picnic–”

“Polly,” I said sharply, “it’s a fallacy. Eula Becker doesn’t cause the rain. She has no connection with the rain. You are guilty of Post Hoc if you blame Eula Becker.”

“I’ll never do it again,” she promised contritely. “Are you mad at me?”
I sighed. “No, Polly, I’m not mad.”

“Then tell me some more fallacies.”
“All right. Let’s try Contradictory Premises.”

“Yes, let’s,” she chirped, blinking her eyes happily.

I frowned, but plunged ahead. “Here’s an example of Contradictory Premises: If God can do anything, can He make a stone so heavy that He won’t be able to lift it?”

“Of course,” she replied promptly.

“But if He can do anything, He can lift the stone,” I pointed out.

“Yeah,” she said thoughtfully. “Well, then I guess He can’t make the stone.”

“But He can do anything,” I reminded her.

She scratched her pretty, empty head. “I’m all confused,” she admitted.

“Of course you are. Because when the premises of an argument contradict each other, there can be no argument. If there is an irresitible force, there can be no immovable object. If there is an immovable object, there can be no irresistible force. Get it?”

“Tell me some more of this keen stuff,” she said eagerly.
I consulted my watch. “I think we’d better call it a night. I’ll take you home now, and you go over all the things you’ve learned. We’ll have another session tomorrow night.”

I deposited her at the girl’s dormitory, where she assured me that she had had a perfectly terrif evening, and I went glumly home to my room. Petey lay snoring in his bed, the raccoon coat huddled like a great hairy beast at his feet. For a moment I considered waking him and telling him that he could have his girl back. It seemed clear that my project was doomed to failure. The girl simply had a logic-proof head.

But then I reconsidered. I had wasted one evening; I might as well waste another. Who knew? Maybe somewhere in the extinct crater of her mind a few embers still smoldered. Maybe somehow I could fan them into flame. Admittedly it was not a prospect fraught with hope, but I decided to give it one more try.
Seated under the oak the next evening I said, “Our first fallacy tonight is called Ad Misericordiam.”

She quivered with delight.

“Listen closely,” I said. “A man applies for a job. When the boss asks him what his qualifications are, he replies that he has a wife and six children at home, the wife is a helpless cripple, the children have nothing to eat, no clothes to wear, no shoes on their feet, there are no beds in the house, no coal in the cellar, and winter is coming.”

A tear rolled down each of Polly’s pink cheeks. “Oh, this is awful,” she sobbed.

“Yes, it’s awful,” I agreed, “but it’s no argument. The man never answered the boss’s question about his qualifications. Instead he appealed to the boss’s sympathy. He committed the fallacy of Ad Misericordiam.

Do you understand?”

“Have you got a handkerchief?” she blubbered.

I handed her a handkerchief and tried to keep from screaming while she wiped her eyes. “Next,” I said in a carefully controlled tone, “we will discuss False Analogy. Here is an example: Students should be allowed to look at their textbooks during examinations. After all, surgeons have X rays to guide them during an operation, lawyers have briefs to guide them during a trial, carpenters have blueprints to guide them when they are building a house. Why, then, shouldn’t students be allowed to look at their textbooks during an examination?”

“There now,” she said enthusiastically, “is the most marvy idea I’ve heard in years.”

“Polly,” I said testily, “the argument is all wrong. Doctors, lawyers, and carpenters aren’t taking a test to see how much they have learned, but students are. The situations are altogether different, and you can’t make an analogy between them.”

“I still think it’s a good idea,” said Polly.

“Nuts,” I muttered. Doggedly I pressed on. “Next we’ll try Hypothesis Contrary to Fact.”

“Sounds yummy,” was Polly’s reaction.

“Listen: If Madame Curie had not happened to leave a photographic plate in a drawer with a chunk of pitchblende, the world today would not know about radium.”

“True, true,” said Polly, nodding her head. “Did you see the movie? Oh, it just knocked me out. That Walter Pidgeon is so dreamy. I mean he fractures me.”

“If you can forget Mr. Pidgeon for a moment,” I said coldly, “I would like to point out that the statement is a fallacy. Maybe Madame Curie would have discovered radium at some later date. Maybe somebody else would have discovered it. Maybe any number of things would have happened. You can’t start with a hypothesis that is not true and then draw any supportable conclusions from it.”

“They ought to put Walter Pidgeon in more pictures,” said Polly. “I hardly ever see him anymore.”
One more chance, I decided. But just one more. There is a limit to what flesh and blood can bear. “The next fallacy is called Poisoning the Well.”

“How cute!” she gurgled.

“Two men are having a debate. The first one gets up and says, ‘My opponent is a notorious liar. You can’t believe a word that he is going to say’… Now, Polly, think. Think hard. What’s wrong?”

I watched her closely as she knit her creamy brow in concentration. Suddenly a glimmer of intelligence–the first I had seen–came into her eyes. “It’s not fair,” she said with indignation. “It’s not a bit fair. What chance has the second man got if the first man calls him a liar before he even begins talking?”

“Right!” I cried exultantly. “One hundred percent right. It’s not fair. The first man has poisoned the well before anybody could drink from it. He has hamstrung his opponent before he could even start… Polly, I’m proud of you.”

“Pshaw,” she murmured, blushing with pleasure.

“You see, my dear, these things aren’t so hard. All you have to do is concentrate. Think–examine–evaluate. Come now, let’s review everything we have learned.”

“Fire away,” she said with an airy wave of her hand.

Heartened by the knowledge that Polly was not altogether a cretin, I began a long, patient review of all I had told her. Over and over and over again I cited instances, pointed out flaws, kept hammering away without letup. It was like digging a tunnel. At first everything was work, sweat, and darkness. I had no idea when I would reach the light, or even if I would. But I persisted. I pounded and clawed and scraped, and finally I was rewarded. I saw a chink of light. And then the chink got bigger and the sun came pouring in and all was bright.

Five grueling nights this took, but it was worth it. I had made a logician out of Polly; I had taught her to think. My job was done. She was worthy of me at last. She was a fit wife for me, a proper hostess for my many mansions, a suitable mother for my well-heeled children.

It must not be thought that I was without love for this girl. Quite the contrary. Just as Pygmalion loved the perfect woman he had fashioned, so I loved mine. The time had come to change our relationship from academic to romantic.

“Polly,” I said when we next sat beneath our oak, “tonight we will not discuss fallacies.”

“Aw, gee,” she said, disappointed.

“My dear,” I said, favoring her with a smile, “we have now spent five evenings together. We have gotten along splendidly. It is clear that we are well matched.”

“Hasty Generalization,” said Polly brightly.
“I beg your pardon,” said I.

“Hasty Generalization,” she repeated. “How can you say that we are well matched on the basis of only five dates?”

I chuckled with amusement. The dear child had learned her lessons well. “My dear,” I said, patting her head in a tolerant manner, “five dates is plenty. After all, you don’t have to eat a whole cake to know that it’s good.”

“False Analogy,” said Polly promptly. “I’m not a cake. I’m a girl.”

I chuckled with somewhat less amusement. The dear child had learned her lesson perhaps too well. I decided to change tactics. Obviously the best approach was a simple, strong, direct declaration of love. I paused for a moment while my massive brain chose the proper words.

Then I began: “Polly, I love you. You are the whole world to me, and the moon and the stars and the constellations of outer space. Please, my darling, say that you will go steady with me, for if you will not, life will be meaningless. I will languish. I will refuse my meals. I will wander the face of the earth, a shambling, hollow-eyed hulk.”

There, I thought, folding my arms, that ought to do it.
“Ad Misericordiam,” said Polly.

I ground my teeth. I was not Pygmalion; I was Frankenstein, and my monster had me by the throat.

Frantically I fought back the tide of panic surging through me. At all costs I had to keep cool.

“Well, Polly,” I said, forcing a smile, “you certainly have learned your fallacies.”

“You’re darn right,” she said with a vigorous nod.

“And who taught them to you, Polly?”

“You did.”

“That’s right. So you do owe me something, don’t you, my dear? If I hadn’t come along you would never have learned about fallacies.”

“Hypothesis Contrary to Fact,” she said instantly.

I dashed perspiration from my brow. “Polly,” I croaked, “You mustn’t take all these things so literally. I mean this is just classroom stuff. You know that the things you learn in school don’t have anything to do with life.”

“Dicto Simpliciter,” she said, wagging her finger at me playfully.

That did it. I leaped to my feet, bellowing like a bull. “Will you or will you not go steady with me?”

“I will not,” she replied.

“Why not?” I demanded.

“Because this afternoon I promised Petey Bellows that I would go steady with him.”

I reeled back, overcome with the infamy of it. After he promised, after he made a deal, after he shook my hand! “That rat!” I shrieked, kicking up great chuncks of turf. “You can’t go with him, Polly. He’s a liar. He’s a cheat. He’s a rat.”

“Poisoning the Well,” said Polly, “and stop shouting. I think shouting must be a fallacy too.”

With an immense effort of will, I modulated my voice. “All right,” I said. “You’re a logician. Let’s look at this thing logically. How could you choose Petey Bellows over me? Look at me–a brilliant student, a tremendous intellectual, a man with an assured future. Look at Petey–a knot-head, a jitterbug, a guy who’ll never know where his next meal is coming from. Can you give me one logical reason why you should go steady with Petey Bellows?”

“I certainly can,” declared Polly. “He’s got a racoon coat.”


Informal Fallacies

1. Read Module 4: Informal Fallacies.

2. Choose twenty (20) informal fallacies.

3. Quote twenty (20) examples of informal fallacies from movies, books, manga of your choice.

4. Explain why each one is an informal fallacy, why each has an error in reasoning.

19 Responses

  1. Fallacies of Relevance:

    1. Argumentum ad Verecundiam
    “Sporting a long hair is prohibited because the dean said so.”

    2. Argumentum ad Hominem
    “He is a gay because he is vain.”

    3. Argumentum ad Populum
    “Everyone thinks white is beautiful, so I might as well use whitening soap.”

    4. Argumentum Ad Baculum
    “Go to sleep or else the monster will come and get you.”

    5. Argumentum Misericordiam
    “I will cry if you won’t let me join in your group.”

    Fallacies of Presumption

    1. Complex Question
    I notice that your grades are failing. Are you addicted to computer games?

    2. False Cause
    I saw a big black dog. Someone will die.

    3. Petitio Principii
    Diego is handsome because he is not ugly.

    4. Accident
    My friend is a Muslim. She is either a terrorist or a DVD merchant.

    5. Converse Accident
    Jose Rizal and Manuel Quezon studied in UST. So all Thomasians are great people.

    Fallacies of Ambiguity:

    1. Equivocation
    Chocolates are sweet. Earl is sweet. Therefore, Earl is a chocolate.

    2. Ampiboly
    He is going to hit the books at home.

    3. Division
    The Manuel clan is all great engineers. So Jerone is a great engineer.

    4. Accent
    He is not a depraved murderer.

    5. Composition
    Thieves and murderers are excluded from the kingdom of heaven, but he is only a thief. Therefore he is not excluded in the kingdom.

    Distraction Fallacies:

    1. False Dilemma
    It’s either you grow up with no direction in life or I will give you an iron hand.

    2. Red Herring
    I will drop this subject because I don’t like the teacher.

    3. Slippery Slope
    Once the government has passed this gun law it becomes easier to pass other gun laws, including laws like confiscation.

    4. False Analogy
    Based on the story Parasite, from onemanga, the Parasite said that humans killing animals as a source of food is not different from Parasites killing humans as a source of their food anytime and anywhere.

    5. Straw Man
    Astrology may be unproven, but neither has it been proven false.

  2. Sir, alam po namin, magbibigay lang ng example, kaya nag isip lang kami ng mga examples na hndi based on books, or other stuffs. ngayon lang namin nakita, sunday na. kaya hindi na kami makakapag meet para gawin ulet before deadline. Sana ok na to.

  3. Examples of Informal Fallacies
    I.ARGUMENTUM AD IGNORANTIAM
    From the movie Camp Rock

    Mitchie: “I didn’t do anything, she (Tess) is lying.”

    Brown:”Do you have any proof?”

    Brown is trying to imply that Tess is telling the truth because Mitchie has no proof that Tess is lying.

    II.ARGUMENTUM AD VERECUNDIAM
    From the movie High School Musical

    Sharpay: I’ve been in 17 school productions, and how many times has been your compositions been selected?

    Kelsie: This will be the first.

    Sharpay: Which tells us what? That you do not offer direction, suggestion or commentary! …Are we clear?

    Sharpay tries to bully Kelsie because the latter tries to give directions for the school play. But the veteran stage actress, Sharpay used her authority to warn Kelsie that she cannot give directions despite of being the director. Therefore Sharpay is using her authority to dictate rules.

    III.ARGUMENTUM AD HOMINEM
    From the movie High School Musical 3 : The Senior Year

    Sharpay: “You (Tiara) are not a singer; you’re a London school girl.”

    Sharpay tries to imply that Tiara cannot sing and dance because she thought that Tiara is a typical nerdy and aloof school girl who transferred from London. Sharpay is using Tiara’s known personality to prove her weakness in another aspect.

    IV.ARGUMENTUM AD POPULUM
    From the movie 13 going on 30

    Jenna: “Razzles are for kids.” (according to the Six Chicks)

    Jenna thinks that Razzles, a type of candy, are too untrendy for her because she is trying to be one of the members of the Six Chicks, a famous group in their school who thinks of Razzles as an unfashionable food to eat.

    V.ARGUMENTUM AD BACULUM
    From the movie The Mummy 3: The Tomb of the Emperor Dragon

    Captain: “I live to serve you my, Lord, I can help you become immortal.”

    Emperor: “If you are lying, you will burn.”

    The following quoted lines is an example of an argument based in forcing. The emperor scared the captain to force the captain to be loyal to him.

    VI.ARGUMENTUM MISERICORDIAM
    From the movie Twilight

    Isabella Swan: N-No I want to drive, it will give me more time to think. And if I get really tired I’ll pull into a motel I promise.

    Charlie Swan: Look Bella, I know I’m not that much fun to be around but I can change that. We can do more stuff together.

    Isabella Swan: Like what? Like watch baseball on the flat screen? Eat at the diner every night? Steak and cobbler. Dad that’s you, that’s not me.

    Charlie Swan: Bella come on. I-I just got you back.
    Isabella Swan: Yea, and you know if I don’t get out now I’ll just be stuck here like mom.

    Charlie Swan begs Bella Swan not to go away from him. He wants to stay with her for he just only stayed with Bella for quite not a long time.

    VII.IGNORANTIO ELENCHI (Missing the Point)
    From the movie The Dark Knight

    The Joker: See, I’m a man of simple tastes. I like dynamite, and gunpowder…
    [the Chechen watches, appalled, as Joker’s thugs pour gasoline on his mountain of cash]

    The Joker: And gasoline! Do you know what all of these things have in common? They’re cheap!
    The joker misses the point of burning the mountain of cash. He said it’s cheap, but it doesn’t follow the reason for burning them.

    VIII.COMPLEX QUESTION
    From the movie Slumdog Millionaire

    Inspector: “My 5 year old daughter can answer that question, but you couldn’t… what happened? Your accomplice leaves out for a piss? ”

    The question he added in the conclusion is not relevant, and assumes in advance. He assumed that Jamal’s accomplice leaves the show for while because Jamal had a difficult time in answering the last question and went of to use a lifeline.

    IX.FALSE CAUSE (non causa pro causa)
    From the movie Slumdog Millionaire

    Young Jamal: “The way he’s taking care of us, he must be a good man.”

    Young Salim: “Must be a bloody saint.”

    Latika: “If we really get seconds, then he really must be a saint.”

    It is wrong to assume that somebody is a saint, just because he has done something that attributes a saint. In this statement, the children assumed that the man who fed them was a saint.

    X.PETITIO PRINCIPII (Begging the Question)
    From the movie High School Musical

    Gabriella: “The wildcat superstar is afraid?”

    Troy: “No, I’m not afraid, I’m just scared.”

    The terms afraid and scared are equivocal.

    XI.ACCIDENT (Sweeping Generalization)
    From the movie High School Musical

    Sharpay: “We should welcome Gabriella in school activities (scholastic decathlon) that are appropriate for her, after all, she loves pi(∏).”

    The premise that Sharpay gave did not satisfy the conclusion. It doesn’t mean that Gabriella mastered pi, she also likes to be part of the quiz team.

    XII.CONVERSE ACCIDENT (Hasty Generalization)
    From the article from TIME magazine entitled Letters by Nancy Whelan Reese

    “When I was four, my father taught me the beauty of numbers, and I have excelled in mathematics ever since.  My conclusion?  The males who grew up with a high aptitude for math are not spending enough time with their daughters.” 

    From the statement itself, it gives a fine example of a hasty generalization. It is not correct to assume that fathers teaches math to their sons alone and make the male race more superior to mathematics.

    XIII.FALSE DILEMMA
    From the speech of George Bush last September 20, 2001

    “Every nation, in every region, now has a decision to make. Either you are with us, or you are with the terrorists.”

    The error here is that one may not want to join either camp. It is because you can make a choice that is not in the choices.

    XIV.EQUIVOCATION
    From the article of Eldridge Cleaver

    “Plato says the end of a thing is its perfection; I say that death is the end of life; hence, death is the perfection of life.”

    Here the word end means goal in Plato’s usage, but it means last event in the author’s second usage. Clearly, the speaker is twisting Plato’s meaning of the word to draw a very different conclusion

    XV.AMPHIBOLY
    From the book Animal Crackers by Groucho Marx.

    I once shot an elephant in my pajamas. How he got in my pajamas I’ll never know.

    Is the elephant real or an image?

    XVI.ACCENT
    From the book Copi

    The first mate, seeking revenge on the captain, wrote in his journal, “The Captain was sober today.”

    He suggests, by his emphasis, that the Captain is usually drunk.

    XVII.COMPOSITION
    From the book Nicomachean Ethics by Aristotle

    Should we not assume that just as the eye, hand, the foot, and in general each part of the body clearly has its own proper function, so man too has some function over and above the function of his parts?

    The composition of the argument is not proper. It is not right to say that something functions because that function is an attribute of its constituent.

    XVIII.DIVISION
    From the movie Slumdog Millionaire

    Inspector: “Professors, doctors, lawyers…never get beyond 60,000 rupees, he (Jamal, a slumdog) is at ten million. What the hell can a slumdog possibly know?”

    Knowing that Jamal is from the slum, The inspector undoubtedly concluded that he is also an idiot, which is the primary attribute of a person from a slum. But the conclusion has no basis. A slum can learn from experience.

    XIX.RED HERRING (Missing the Point)
    From the movie, The Da Vinci Code

    Silas: Each breath you take is a sin. No shadow will be safe again, for you will be hunted by angels.

    XX.SLIPPERY SLOPE
    From the movie Coach Carter

    Coach Carter: If these boys cannot honor the simple rules of a basketball contract, how long do you think it will be before they’re out there breaking the law?

    It is improper to assume a future event basing on the simple synonymous activity. The players are predicted to be criminals in the future because of their simple disobedience of rules in basketball, which does not follow at all.

    XXI.FALSE ANALOGY
    From Fox News

    “Gas prices up 39% since Dems picked Nancy Pelosi”, the newscaster says.

    Unfortunately, there is absolutely no evidence presented to indicate a cause-effect relationship between Nancy Pelosi becoming speaker of the House of Representatives and rise in gas prices. However, the statement suggests the idea, the false analogy that both democrats and Nancy Pelosi are responsible for rising fuel prices.

    XXII.STRAW MAN
    From a review critic, http://media.www.dailylobo.com

    “The Barack Obama campaign claims John McCain’s plan would put senior citizens’ social security in the stock market.
    This attacks the distortion of McCain’s actual position, which is a Straw man policy. Likewise, the McCain campaign constantly distorts Obama’s tax plan, another Straw man.

    XXIII.FALSE DILEMMA
    From the advertisement of MasterCard

    “There are some things money can’t buy. For everything else, there is MasterCard.”
    The punch line of the advertisement is creating a fallacy as it states that MasterCardexists for everything that can be bought.

  4. I. Argumentum ad Baculum
    (Appeal to Force)

    Ladies and Gentlemen of the jury, if you do not bring in a verdict of guilty, you may be this killer’s next victim!

    II. Argumentum ad Misericordiam
    (Appeal To Pity)

    There is no question that what is young man did is intolerable and repugnant. He admits it himself, But you’re not here to evaluate this man’s conduct morally; you’re here to try him and determines his guilt or innocence. And as you think this over, I want you to think about this young man, his home life and his future, which you now hold in your hands. Think about his broken home, never knowing his father, being left by his mother. Think about the poverty he’s known, the foster homes, the birthdays getting unnoticed, and the Christmas he’s never had. And think hard about what life in prison will do to him. Think about these things, and I know who will acquit him of this crime.

    III. Argumentum ad Ignorantiam
    (Appeal to Ignorance)

    Scientists have not proven that AIDS cannot be through casual contact. Therefore, we should avoid casual contact with suspected AIDS carrier.

    IV. Argumentum ad Hominem
    (Attack on the Person)

    The so-called theories of Einstein are merely the ravings of a mind polluted with liberal, democratic nonsense which is utterly unacceptable to German men of science.

    V. Fallacy of Equivocation

    All elephants are animals and Henri is an elephant, and Henri is a small elephant; therefore Henri is a small animal.

    VI. Straw Man Fallacy

    Your argument is absurd because you want to eliminate private corporations from manufacturing.

    VII. Accident
    Sweeping Generalization

    “Since the Bible says, ‘Thou shall not kill,’ it would be wrong to exterminate the termites in City Hall.” –R. Burton

    VIII. Amphiboly

    “Although you have said you will give me no more of your time, I’ll not ask for any more of your time; I’ll just ask for the amount of time you have already given once more.” –McCain

    IX. Complex Question

    “I’ve often speculated why you don’t return to America. Did you abscond with the church funds? Did you run off with a senator’s wife? I like to think that you killed a man. It’s the romantic in me.” -Casablanca-

    X. Composition

    “I’m not a bad person. I’ve adopted a dolphin from the World Wide Life Fund. I buy organic milk, free-range eggs and always put recycling out at Thursday.” – Readers Digest –

    XI. Argumentum ad Populum
    (Appeal to the People)

    “I can tell you with no ego, this is my finest sword. If on your journey, you should encounter God, God will be cut.” – Kill Bill Volume I (Hattori Hanzo)

    XII. Ignorantio Elenchi
    Missing the point

    “Of course I haven’t! He killed my mum and dad! -HARRY POTTER

    XIII. Argumentum ad Verecundiam
    (Appeal to Inappropriate Authority)

    “…The Terminator knew; he tried to tell us. But I didn’t want to hear it. Maybe the future has been written. I don’t know; all I know is what the Terminator taught me – never stop fighting. And I never will. The battle has just begun.”
    [Terminator 3: Rise of the Machines (2003)]

    XIV. Petitio Principii
    (Begging the Question)

    “Dear Friend, a man who has studied law to its highest degree is a brilliant lawyer, for a brilliant lawyer has studied law to its highest degree.” Oscar Wilde, De Profundis.

    XV. False Dillema

    “It all depends on whether he is strong enough or not. Either he’ll kill her himself,” – she turned to meet my gaze again, glaring – “which would really irritate me, Edward, not to mention what it would do to you – “ she faced Jasper again, “or she’ll be one of us someday.” –Alice Cullen, Chapter 4, Midnight Sun by Stephenie Meyer

    XVI. Division

    The universe has existed for fifteen billion years.
    The universe is made out of molecules.
    Therefore, each of the molecules in the universe has existed for fifteen billion years.
    –Thomas Mautner (Editor), A Dictionary of Philosophy (Blackwell, 1996)—

    XVII. Slippery Slope

    “You should not date him because you might fall in love with him and later might get hurt, then, you’ll go back to me and ask me why I set up him to you.” (One Tree Hill)

  5. Informal Fallacies
    I. Fallacies of Relevance
    a. Argumentum Ad Ignorantiam (Apeeal to Ignorance)
    • Example: “Of Course the Bible is true. Nobody can prove otherwise.(Man for All Seasons)”
    • It does not mean that if nobody can prove the validity of the bible it is true.

    b. Argumentum Ad Verecundiam (Appeal to Inappropriate Authority)
    • Example: “Naomi Watts said in an interview that China’s misfortunes due to earthquakes are their bad karma for treating Tibetans badly.
    • Naomi Watts is not a Guru or a psychic to make such statement.

    c. Argumentum Ad Hominem (Appeal to Man)
    • Example: “Edward is a known traitor to peace agreement his blood runs the veins of his son so why should we trust Albert? (Brave heart).”
    • It may be true that fruit comes from the root but it is unfair to readily judge someone you haven’t met yet.
    d. Argumentum Ad Populum (Appeal to the People)
    • Example: “Marijuana is legal in Amsterdam; it must be the best place in the world. (Euro Trip).”
    • Marijuana is not a basis for the best place in the world.
    e. Argumentum Ad Misericordiam (Appeal to the pity)
    • Example: “Joe Buck: You goddamn liar!! Gimme back my 20 dollars.
    Ratso: Wait, don’t hurt me my friend Im just a poor cripple. Here just take all my money.(Midnight Cowboy)”
    • He uses his disability to be safe.

    f. Argumentum Ad Baculum (Appeal to Force)
    • Example: “The bible is the only truth. Those who disagree like those infidels will burn in hell. (Kingdom of Heaven)”
    • He used a threat to increase favor.

    g. Ignorantio Elenchi (Irrelevant Conclusion)
    • Example: “Senator Johnson should not be held accountable for cheating on his income tax. After all, there are other senators who have done far worse things. (P.R Man)”
    • The conclusion does not have anything to do with the accusation.

    II. Fallacies of Presumption
    a. Complex Question (Truth buried in the question)
    • Example: “If a choice must be made, I’ll adopt God’s nonexistence as a working assumption. If I am mistaken, I hope He is not offended by my demand for evidence. (Many believers seem to think that God is offended by atheists. Is he overly proud or merely insecure?)
    (Kent Bach, Exit-Existentialism, 14.)
    • The statement is like saying that God is really offended by atheists.

    b. False Cause (“After this, therefore because of this”)
    • Example: “We hear that a writer has just filed a two million dollar lawsuit against the Coors beer company for pickling his brain. It seems that he had been consuming large quantities of Coors’ 3.2 beer, containing only 3.2 percent alcohol and so supposedly non-intoxicating, at his local tavern. But, the suit contends, the stuff was insidiously marinating his mind; and as a result he has been unable to finish writing his second novel. The author may have a point. But we have to wonder whether the damage was caused by the beer, or by the current fad of product liability suits.” Wall Street Journal (02.14.79).
    • The beer should not the one be blamed.

    c. Petitio Principii (“The conclusion merely restates the premises, with minor changes”)
    • Example: “The reason I keep insisting that there was a relationship between Iraq and Saddam and Al-Qaeda is because there was a relationship between Iraq and Al-Qaeda. –George W. Bush”
    • The second statement is merely a restatement of the first.

    d. Accident (A general rule is applied to a case it was not intended to cover)
    • Example: “Senator: All mutants are capable of doing harm to people simply because they have powers (X-MEN)”
    • Some mutants are good like Cyclops.

    e. Converse Accident (Drawing of conclusion about a population from a relatively small sample)
    • Example: “British Officer: I refuse to be under a Japanese officer. Jap. Captain: You British are all stupid. (Bridge on the River Kwai).”
    • The Jap asserts the quality of a race through one example.

    III. Fallacies of Ambiguity
    a. Equivocation (Words that have different meaning but the same spelling are used in a single statement)
    • Example: “ Love is blind; God is love; Therefore God is Blind”
    • Love in the first two premises have different meaning

    b. Amphiboly (Statements have more than one plausible meaning)
    • Example: “Sign at the back of a truck: Isang linggong hirap, isang gabing sarap.”
    • The word “sarap” is not clearly defined. It could mean sleep after a long week’s work or something else you do to your wife.

    c. Accent (Emphasis is used to suggest meaning different from the actual content of the proposition)
    • Example: “Stacy and her Mom both have a nice piece of ass, she’s really sexy. (Hot Chick)”
    • Who is sexy? Stacy or her Mom?
    d. Composition (A conclusion is drawn about a whole based on the features of its constituents when, in fact, no justification is provided for the inference.)
    • Example: “Carbon fiber is lightweight. Therefore machines made on it are lightweight”.
    • It may be true if all the components is made of carbon fiber but that is unlikely to happen because there are also some heavy-weighted material added to it

    e. Division (A person infers that what is true of a whole must also be true of its constituents and justification for that inference is not provided)
    • Example: “The ball is blue; therefore all atoms that make it up are also blue.”
    • Atoms as far as I know are colorless.

    IV. Fallacies of Distraction
    a. Red Herring (An irrelevant topic is presented in order to divert attention from the original issue. The basic idea is to win an argument by leading attention away from the argument and to another topic.)
    • Example: “I think there is a 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.”
    • The point that salary will not affected is irrelevant to the previous premise of making requirements stricter.

    b. Slippery Slope (A person asserts that some event must inevitably follow from another without any argument from the inevitability of the event in question.)
    • Example: “If we legalize Marijuana, then more people would start to take crack and heroin, and we’d have to legalize those too. Before long we’d have a nation full of drug-addicts on welfare. Therefore, we cannot legalize Marijuana.”
    • The use of Marijuana does not guarantee the increase of usage of other dangerous substance.

    c. False Analogy (Both A and P, but are different in one way)
    • Example: “Employees are like nails. Just as nails must be hit in the head to make them work, so are employees.”
    • The analogy states that employees must experience hardship in order to do their job.

    d. Straw Man (A person simply ignores a person’s actual position and substitutes a distorted, exaggerated or misrepresented version of that position.)
    • Example: “Using Styrofoam is bad because it promotes global warming. Global warming kills and endangers thousand species of animals.
    • The bad effects of using Styrofoam are greatly emphasized on the introduction of the effects of global warming.

    e. False Dilemma (If both claims could be false, then it cannot be inferred that one is true because the other is false.)
    • Example: “If I have a girlfriend my grades will surely go down. Thus, I think I’m better off myself.”
    • It does not follow that if you have a girlfriend you will fail your subjects.

  6. Sir, I have already read this story. Haha. LOL. I just want to share 🙂

  7. Fallacies of Relevance

    Argumentum Ad Ignorantiam
    • Appeal to Ignorance
    o Example: “Of Course the Bible is true. Nobody can prove otherwise.(Man for All Seasons)”
     It does not mean that if nobody can prove the validity of the bible it is true.

    Argumentum Ad Verecundiam
    • Appeal to Inappropriate Authority
    o Example: “Naomi Watts said in an interview that China’s misfortunes due to earthquakes are their bad karma for treating Tibetans badly.
     Naomi Watts is not a Guru or a psychic to make such statement.

    Argumentum Ad Hominem
    • Appeal to Man
    o Example: “Edward is a known traitor to peace agreement his blood runs the veins of his son so why should we trust Albert? (Brave heart).”
     It may be true that fruit comes from the root but it is unfair to readily judge someone you haven’t met yet.

    Argumentum Ad Populum
    • Appeal to the People
    o Example: “Marijuana is legal in Amsterdam; it must be the best place in the world. (Euro Trip).”
     Marijuana is not a basis for the best place in the world.

    Argumentum Ad Misericordiam
    • Appeal to the pity
    o Example: “Joe Buck: You goddamn liar!! Gimme back my 20 dollars. Ratso: Wait, don’t hurt me my friend Im just a poor cripple. Here just take all my money.(Midnight Cowboy)”
     He uses his disability to be safe.

    Argumentum Ad Baculum
    • Appeal to Force
    o Example: “The bible is the only truth. Those who disagree like those infidels will burn in hell. (Kingdom of Heaven)”
     He used a threat to increase favor.

    Ignorantio Elenchi
    • Irrelevant Conclusion
    o Example: “Senator Johnson should not be held accountable for cheating on his income tax. After all, there are other senators who have done far worse things. (P.R Man)”
     The conclusion does not have anything to do with the accusation.

    Fallacies of Presumption
    Complex Question
    • Truth buried in the question
    o Example: “If a choice must be made, I’ll adopt God’s nonexistence as a working assumption. If I am mistaken, I hope He is not offended by my demand for evidence. (Many believers seem to think that God is offended by atheists. Is he overly proud or merely insecure?)
    (Kent Bach, Exit-Existentialism, 14.)
     The statement is like saying that God is really offended by atheists.
    False Cause
    • “After this, therefore because of this”
    o Example: “We hear that a writer has just filed a two million dollar lawsuit against the Coors beer company for pickling his brain. It seems that he had been consuming large quantities of Coors’ 3.2 beer, containing only 3.2 percent alcohol and so supposedly non-intoxicating, at his local tavern. But, the suit contends, the stuff was insidiously marinating his mind; and as a result he has been unable to finish writing his second novel. The author may have a point. But we have to wonder whether the damage was caused by the beer, or by the current fad of product liability suits.” Wall Street Journal (02.14.79).
     The beer should not the one be blamed.

    Petitio Principii
    • “The conclusion merely restates the premises, with minor changes”
    o Example: “The reason I keep insisting that there was a relationship between Iraq and Saddam and Al-Qaeda is because there was a relationship between Iraq and Al-Qaeda. –George W. Bush”
     The second statement is merely a restatement of the first.

    Accident
    • A general rule is applied to a case it was not intended to cover
    o Example: “Senator: All mutants are capable of doing harm to people simply because they have powers (X-MEN)”
     Some mutants are good like Cyclops.

    Converse Accident
    • Drawing of conclusion about a population from a relatively small sample
    o Example: “British Officer: I refuse to be under a Japanese officer. Jap. Captain: You British are all stupid. (Bridge on the River Kwai).”
     The Jap asserts the quality of a race through one example.

    Fallacies of Ambiguity

    Equivocation
    • Words that have different meaning but the same spelling are used in a single statement
    o Example: “ Love is blind; God is love; Therefore God is Blind”
     Love in the first two premises have different meaning

    Amphiboly
    • Statements have more than one plausible meaning
    o Example: “Sign at the back of a truck: Isang linggong hirap, isang gabing sarap.”
     The word “sarap” is not clearly defined. It could mean sleep after a long week’s work or something else you do to your wife.

    Accent
    • Emphasis is used to suggest meaning different from the actual content of the proposition
    o Example: “Stacy and her Mom both have a nice piece of ass, she’s really sexy. (Hot Chick)”
     Who is sexy? Stacy or her Mom?

    Composition
    • A conclusion is drawn about a whole based on the features of its constituents when, in fact, no justification is provided for the inference.
    o Example: “Carbon fiber is lightweight. Therefore machines made on it are lightweight”.
     It may be true if all the components is made of carbon fiber but that is unlikely to happen because there are also some heavy-weighted material added to it

    Division
    • A person infers that what is true of a whole must also be true of its constituents and justification for that inference is not provided
    o Example: “The ball is blue; therefore all atoms that make it up are also blue.”
     Atoms as far as I know are colorless.

    Fallacies of Distraction

    Red Herring
    • An irrelevant topic is presented in order to divert attention from the original issue. The basic idea is to win an argument by leading attention away from the argument and to another topic.
    o Example: “I think there is a 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.”
     The point that salary will not affected is irrelevant to the previous premise of making requirements stricter.

    Slippery Slope
    • A person asserts that some event must inevitably follow from another without any argument from the inevitability of the event in question.
    o Example: “If we legalize Marijuana, then more people would start to take crack and heroin, and we’d have to legalize those too. Before long we’d have a nation full of drug-addicts on welfare. Therefore, we cannot legalize Marijuana.”
     The use of Marijuana does not guarantee the increase of usage of other dangerous substance.

    False Analogy
    • Both A and P, but are different in one way
    o Example: “Employees are like nails. Just as nails must be hit in the head to make them work, so are employees.”
     The analogy states that employees must experience hardship in order to do their job.

    Straw Man
    • A person simply ignores a person’s actual position and substitutes a distorted, exaggerated or misrepresented version of that position.
    o Example: “Using Styrofoam is bad because it promotes global warming. Global warming kills and endangers thousand species of animals.
     The bad effects of using Styrofoam are greatly emphasized on the introduction of the effects of global warming.

    False Dilemma
    • If both claims could be false, then it cannot be inferred that one is true because the other is false.
    o Example: “If I have a girlfriend my grades will surely go down. Thus, I think I’m better off myself.”
     It does not follow that if you have a girlfriend you will fail your subjects.

  8. A. Fallacies of Relevance
    1. Argumentum ad Ignorantiam ( Appeal to Ignorance )
    “Since the class has no questions concerning the topics discussed in class, the class is ready for a test.” –( Marcelina Ramal, fourth year highschool teacher of Bernie Antopina)

    Reason:
    It does not mean that if the class has no questions about the lesson, they are already prepared for the quiz. There could have been some reasons why the class is not asking questions. One of the reason is that they could not understand the lesson well, or another reason is that, they are shy to raise their questions.

    2. Argumentum ad Verecundiam (Appeal to Inappropriate Authority)
    The brilliant William Jenkins, the recent Nobel Prize winner in physics, states uncategorically that the flu virus will be controlled in essentially all of its forms by the year 2,050. The opinion of such a great man cannot be disregarded.

    Reason:
    This is a fallacy because William Jenkins excel in the field of physics, and physics doesn’t cover the study of Flu Virus.
    .
    3. Argumentum ad Hominem (Attack on the person)
    Prof. Smith says to Prof. White, “You are much too hard on your students,” and Prof. White replies, “But certainly you are not the one to say so. Just last week I heard several of your students complaining.”

    Reason:
    This is a fallacy because Prof. White attacks on the personality of Prof. Smith.

    4. Argumentum ad Populum (Attack to the People)
    “Man could alleviate his misery by marriage. This close companionship enhances the joys of one and mitigated the sorrow of the other, and anyone knew God always provided for married people.” Lee Emily Pearson, Elizabethans at Home, (Stanford Univ. Pr.), 289.

    Reason:
    In general, it is not by marriage that man can alleviate his misery.

    5. Argumentum Misericordiam (Appeal to Pity)
    “You have to give me at least a B in the course. If I don’t receive at least a B, I won’t be able to take classes in my major next semester. You just have to accept my paper, even though its six weeks late. I’ve had a very difficult semester. I’ve had to help my classmate deal with his drug problem. My parent s are having problem. It was impossible to concentrate on a paper earlier in the semester! So, you just have to accept it, even if it’s a bit late.”

    Reason:
    A professor’s syllabus usually spells out the working principles of a course. Among those are the grading scale and policies regarding the late submission of work. Like moral principles, these policies are universal; they apply to everyone in the class. The fallacious appeals to pity contend that. Due to an emotion-evoking situation, there are reasons for the professor to treat one student differently from the others.

    6. Argumentum ad Baculum (Appeal to force)
    If you want to continue working here, then you should contribute to Greenpeace.

    Reason:
    The reason you are told that you should contribute to Greenpeace is of the wrong sort. There should be no connection between your job status and your political contributions. The argument commits the fallacy of appeal to force.

    7. Ignorantio Elenchi (Missing the Point)
    All parents in this city want better schools for their children. MY new tax proposals will raise enough money to build ten new schools and completely staff them with the most qualifies teachers available. I need your support for this new proposal.
    Reason:
    It is possible to agree to the need for better schools without agreeing to the speaker’s specific proposal and the taxes to pay for it. The speaker gives no reason why the specific proposal is the only possible solution to the school problem. There are no relevant premise that supports this tax proposal as the best way to get desired results. This commits the fallacy of irrelevant conclusion.

    B. Fallacies of Presumption
    1. Complex Question
    “Look very closely. You will see that no person and no circumstance can prevent you from becoming a self-understanding man or woman. Who is stopping you at this very moment? No one.” Vernon Howard, The Mystic Path of Cosmic Power (New Life Foundation, 1999)

    2. False Clause
    “We hear that a writer has just filed a two million dollar lawsuit against the Coors beer company for pickling his brain. It seems that he had been consuming large quantities of Coors’ 3.2 beer, containing only 3.2 percent alcohol and so supposedly non-intoxicating, at his local tavern. But, the suit contends, the stuff was insidiously marinating his mind; and as a result he has been unable to finish writing his second novel. The author may have a point. But we have to wonder whether the damage was caused by the beer, or by the current fad of product liability suits.” Wall Street Journal (02.14.79).

    3. Petitio Principii (Begging the Question)
    “Dear Friend, a man who has studied law to its highest degree is a brilliant lawyer, for a brilliant lawyer has studied law to its highest degree.” Oscar Wilde, De Profundis.

    Reason:
    He is just reasoning in “circle”.

    4. Converse Accident
    “When I was four, my father taught me the beauty of numbers, and I have excelled in mathematics ever since. My conclusion? The males who grew up with a high aptitude for math are not spending enough time with their daughters.” Nancy Whelan Reese, “Letters,” Time, (Vol. 117, No. 1), 6.

    Reason:
    The reasoning is wrong because it is just based on her own experience.

    5. False Dilemma
    “Either the nobles of this country appear wealthy, in which case they can be taxed for good; or they appear poor, in which case they are living frugally and must have immense savings, which can be taxed for good.”

    Reason:
    This is a false dilemma, because some members of the nobility may in fact lack liquid assets.
    C. Fallacies of Ambiguity
    1. Equivocation
    Really exciting novels are rare. But rare books are expensive. Therefore, Really exciting novels are expensive.
    Reason:
    The word “rare” is used in different ways in the two premises of the argument, so the link they seem to establish between the terms of the conclusion is spurious. In its more subtle occurrences, this fallacy can undermine the reliability of otherwise valid deductive arguments.

    2. Amphiboly
    * A reckless motorist Thursday struck and injured a student who was jogging through the campus in his pickup truck.
    * Therefore, it is unsafe to jog in your pickup truck.

    Reason:
    In this example, the premise (actually heard on a radio broadcast) could be interpreted in different ways, creating the possibility of a fallacious inference to the conclusion.

    3. Accent
    Clouseau: I’LL stand on YOUR shoulders
    Kato: Why?
    Clouseau: Because I’m taller than you are – you fewl
    (from the movie, pink panther)

    Reason:
    The intended accent is “I’LL stand on YOUR shoulders”, as you can see in here; the word “your” can have different pronunciation which gives different meaning.

    4. Composition
    In twilight, “That’s Edward. He’s gorgeous, of course, don’t waste your time… Apparently none of the girls here are good-looking enough for him.” So therefore, for edward there’s no beautiful for him
    Reason:
    People have different views, so what’s true of the part may not be true of the whole, so this conclusion could be false even if the premise is true.
    5. Division
    In the article of “my true love”, Asia countries, where people find themselves unable to express their feeling openly and or make decisions due to cultural pressures. So Singaporeans too find themselves difficult to express their feelings.

    Reason:
    In this example, we can see that when one reason is true then some or all of its parts must also be true. Because Asia is a continent, therefore singapore is a part of asia.

    D. Fallacies of Distraction
    1. Red Herring
    “The seriousness of a punishment should match the seriousness of the crime. Right now, the punishment for drunk driving may simply be a fine. But drunk driving is a very serious crime that can kill innocent people. So the death penalty should be the punishment for drunk driving.”
    Reason:
    The argument actually supports several conclusions—”The punishment for drunk driving should be very serious,” in particular—but it doesn’t support the claim that the death penalty, specifically, is warranted.

    2. Slippery Slope
    “I created Akatsuki in order to break that chain of hatred… If I don’t do this, there will be no peace. Eventually, time will pass and the pain will heal. Eventually the checkmate’s power will weaken and the people will begin fighting again. This time they will use the weapon themselves and once more know true pain. And then for a short time of peace will come again. It will give birth to short periods of peace within this endless chain of hatred.”
    -Pain, Naruto Chapter 436
    Reason:
    The speaker formulated a conclusion which is undesirable and some steps are implausible.

    3. False Analogy
    “We are just ordinary people driven to revenge in the name of justice. But if revenge is called justice, then that justice breeds yet more revenge and becomes a chain of hatred.”
    -Pain, Naruto Chapter 436
    Reason:
    People and Justice are two incomparable things.

    4. Straw Man
    “From the beginning I said Obama isn’t going to work… They(Ronald Reagan, George Bush, Bill Clinton, George W. Bush) don’t support peace. It’s against what they do: invasions, occupations, wars.”
    -Concepcion Picciotto
    The Protester who Outlasts Presidents, The Philippine Starweek Vol. XXIII No. 7, March 22, 2009
    Reason:
    Concepcion Picciotto made a weak argument and attacked that argument.

    5. False Dilemma
    The big dilemma Harry Osborne has to come down to is does he love his friend; he knows he loves his friend but if he just accepts that and goes with that friendship he has to accept the fact that his life up until now has been a lie and false and a total waste. He has been living for hate. He has been loving an evil man and doing this evil man’s bidding. It’s hard to face that you’ve been doing wrong after so long.
    -Spiderman 3

  9. This is really our final answer. Sorry for the inconvenienve sir.
    I. Argumentum ad Baculum
    (Appeal to Force)

    Ladies and Gentlemen of the jury, if you do not bring in a verdict of guilty, you may be this killer’s next victim!

    The speaker is obviously forcing the listeners’ to do what he asks or else something unpleasant may happen to them. It only implies that the listeners’ are forced to do what they are asked to to avoid them harm.

    II. Argumentum ad Misericordiam
    (Appeal To Pity)

    There is no question that what this young man did is intolerable and repugnant. He admits it himself, But you’re not here to evaluate this man’s conduct morally; you’re here to try him and determines his guilt or innocence. And as you think this over, I want you to think about this young man, his home life and his future, which you now hold in your hands. Think about his broken home, never knowing his father, being left by his mother. Think about the poverty he’s known, the foster homes, the birthdays getting unnoticed, and the Christmas he’s never had. And think hard about what life in prison will do to him. Think about these things, and I know who will acquit him of this crime.

    The main concern here is what the young man did and what are the possible punishments that should be given to him. The speaker is giving reasons to make the young man not guilty of what he did, but the real problem is what should be the young man’s punishment for doing such acts. The speaker is indirectly begging for mercy.

    III. Argumentum ad Ignorantiam
    (Appeal to Ignorance)

    Scientists have not proven that AIDS cannot be through casual contact. Therefore, we should avoid casual contact with suspected AIDS carrier.

    This doesn’t imply that AIDS is passed through physical contact just because it has not been proven that it can’t. There are still other ways where in AIDS can be transmitted.

    IV. Argumentum ad Hominem
    (Attack on the Person)

    The so-called theories of Einstein are merely the ravings of a mind polluted with liberal, democratic nonsense which is utterly unacceptable to German men of science.

    Einstein is attacked here by criticizing him because of his works that are not agreeable to some German.

    V. Argumentum ad Verecundiam
    (Appeal to Inappropriate Authority)

    “…The Terminator knew; he tried to tell us. But I didn’t want to hear it. Maybe the future has been written. I don’t know; all I know is what the Terminator taught me – never stop fighting. And I never will. The battle has just begun.”
    [Terminator 3: Rise of the Machines (2003)]

    The speaker doesn’t want to give his reason that is why he used the Terminator as the authority for what he believes in.

    VI. Argumentum ad Populum
    (Appeal to the People)

    “I can tell you with no ego, this is my finest sword. If on your journey, you should encounter God, God will be cut.” – Kill Bill Volume I (Hattori Hanzo)

    It doesn’t directly imply that the sword will be effective that it can cut God just only because the speaker renounced his ego.

    VII. Ignorantio Elenchi
    (Missing the point)

    “Of course I haven’t! He killed my mum and dad! -HARRY POTTER

    Harry Potter is being asked whether he killed his parents, but he gave a reason that can somehow make him not guilty. Nevertheless, his reason is a fallacy because it is out of the question. He was just asked for reasons that could prove him not guilty of the murder. Instead of giving some that can defend him, he pointed another person to blame.

    VIII. Complex Question

    “I’ve often speculated why you don’t return to America. Did you abscond with the church funds? Did you run off with a senator’s wife? I like to think that you killed a man. It’s the romantic in me.” –Casablanca

    The first sentence already reveals that there are another set of questions to be asked.

    IX. Petitio Principii
    (Begging the Question)

    “Dear Friend, a man who has studied law to its highest degree is a brilliant lawyer, for a brilliant lawyer has studied law to its highest degree.” Oscar Wilde, De Profundis.

    Obviously, the statement given is just restating the conclusion as a premise. It only revolves on one idea.

    X. Accident
    (Sweeping Generalization)

    “Since the Bible says, ‘Thou shall not kill,’ it would be wrong to exterminate the termites in City Hall.” –R. Burton

    The statement “Thou shall not kill” doesn’t apply to all who are living beings. It doesn’t generally mean that those who are living can’t be killed. It is only applied to the highest creation of God which is man.

    XI. Fallacy of Equivocation

    All elephants are animals and Henri is an elephant, and Henri is a small elephant; therefore Henri is a small animal.

    The first statement already implies a fallacy because it doesn’t necessarily mean that all the animals are regarded as elephants.

    XII. Accent
    I resent that letter.
    This sentence could mean either that one sent the letter again, or that one has a feeling of resentment towards it. If you concluded, falsely, on the basis of the sentence, that the speaker sent the letter again, then you would have committed a fallacy of accent.

    XIII. Amphiboly

    “Although you have said you will give me no more of your time, I’ll not ask for any more of your time; I’ll just ask for the amount of time you have already given once more.” –McCain

    One who will be able to read this maybe confused because of the words’ arrangement in the statement.

    XIV. Composition
    Sodium and Chloride are both dangerous to humans. Therefore any combination of sodium and chloride will be dangerous to humans.

    We all know that Sodium Chloride is the chemical name for the compound salt and salt is very essential for human survival. Though individually they are poisonous, it is not right to conclude that when they are combined as one it is poisonous.

    XV. False Dilemma

    “It all depends on whether he is strong enough or not. Either he’ll kill her himself,” – she turned to meet my gaze again, glaring – “which would really irritate me, Edward, not to mention what it would do to you – “ she faced Jasper again, “or she’ll be one of us someday.” –Alice Cullen, Chapter 4, Midnight Sun by Stephenie Meyer

    It doesn’t mean that if he is not strong enough he will kill himself.

    XVI. Division

    The universe has existed for fifteen billion years.
    The universe is made out of molecules.
    Therefore, each of the molecules in the universe has existed for fifteen billion years.
    –Thomas Mautner (Editor), A Dictionary of Philosophy (Blackwell, 1996)—

    The universe is taken as a unit but not individually. Its subparts like the molecules is not the main subject in the statement but the whole universe itself.

    XVII. Slippery Slope

    “You should not date him because you might fall in love with him and later might get hurt, then, you’ll go back to me and ask me why I set up him to you.” (One Tree Hill)

    The possibility that the speaker gave in this statement is only one of the many that might occur. Thus, if she dated him, she can also be happy and thank her for setting them up or there are other events that could lead when she would date the guy.

    XVIII. Red Herring Fallacy

    “You may claim that the death penalty is an ineffective deterrent against crime — but what about the victims of crime? How do you think surviving family members feel when they see the man who murdered their son kept in prison at their expense? Is it right that they should pay for their son’s murderer to be fed and housed?”

    The speaker is diverting the listeners from the main issue which is about the death penalty.

    XIX. False Analogy

    “Just as in time the gentle rain can wear down the tallest mountains, so, in human life, all problems can be solved by patience and quiet persistence.”

    It may have been proven that the rain can wear down the tallest mountains but it can’t be concluded that it can also be applied in solving human problems.

    XX. Straw Man Fallacy

    “Your argument is absurd because you want to eliminate private corporations from manufacturing.”

    The speaker attacked the argument of the person through pointing out irrelevant issues.

  10. This is really our final answer. Sorry for the inconvenienve sir.
    I. Argumentum ad Baculum
    (Appeal to Force)

    Ladies and Gentlemen of the jury, if you do not bring in a verdict of guilty, you may be this killer’s next victim!

    The speaker is obviously forcing the listeners’ to do what he asks or else something unpleasant may happen to them. It only implies that the listeners’ are forced to do what they are asked to to avoid them harm.

    II. Argumentum ad Misericordiam
    (Appeal To Pity)

    There is no question that what this young man did is intolerable and repugnant. He admits it himself, But you’re not here to evaluate this man’s conduct morally; you’re here to try him and determines his guilt or innocence. And as you think this over, I want you to think about this young man, his home life and his future, which you now hold in your hands. Think about his broken home, never knowing his father, being left by his mother. Think about the poverty he’s known, the foster homes, the birthdays getting unnoticed, and the Christmas he’s never had. And think hard about what life in prison will do to him. Think about these things, and I know who will acquit him of this crime.

    The main concern here is what the young man did and what are the possible punishments that should be given to him. The speaker is giving reasons to make the young man not guilty of what he did, but the real problem is what should be the young man’s punishment for doing such acts. The speaker is indirectly begging for mercy.

    III. Argumentum ad Ignorantiam
    (Appeal to Ignorance)

    Scientists have not proven that AIDS cannot be through casual contact. Therefore, we should avoid casual contact with suspected AIDS carrier.

    This doesn’t imply that AIDS is passed through physical contact just because it has not been proven that it can’t. There are still other ways where in AIDS can be transmitted.

    IV. Argumentum ad Hominem
    (Attack on the Person)

    The so-called theories of Einstein are merely the ravings of a mind polluted with liberal, democratic nonsense which is utterly unacceptable to German men of science.

    Einstein is attacked here by criticizing him because of his works that are not agreeable to some German.

    V. Argumentum ad Verecundiam
    (Appeal to Inappropriate Authority)

    “…The Terminator knew; he tried to tell us. But I didn’t want to hear it. Maybe the future has been written. I don’t know; all I know is what the Terminator taught me – never stop fighting. And I never will. The battle has just begun.”
    [Terminator 3: Rise of the Machines (2003)]

    The speaker doesn’t want to give his reason that is why he used the Terminator as the authority for what he believes in.

    VI. Argumentum ad Populum
    (Appeal to the People)

    “I can tell you with no ego, this is my finest sword. If on your journey, you should encounter God, God will be cut.” – Kill Bill Volume I (Hattori Hanzo)

    It doesn’t directly imply that the sword will be effective that it can cut God just only because the speaker renounced his ego.

    VII. Ignorantio Elenchi
    (Missing the point)

    “Of course I haven’t! He killed my mum and dad! -HARRY POTTER

    Harry Potter is being asked whether he killed his parents, but he gave a reason that can somehow make him not guilty. Nevertheless, his reason is a fallacy because it is out of the question. He was just asked for reasons that could prove him not guilty of the murder. Instead of giving some that can defend him, he pointed another person to blame.

    VIII. Complex Question

    “I’ve often speculated why you don’t return to America. Did you abscond with the church funds? Did you run off with a senator’s wife? I like to think that you killed a man. It’s the romantic in me.” –Casablanca

    The first sentence already reveals that there are another set of questions to be asked.

    IX. Petitio Principii
    (Begging the Question)

    “Dear Friend, a man who has studied law to its highest degree is a brilliant lawyer, for a brilliant lawyer has studied law to its highest degree.” Oscar Wilde, De Profundis.

    Obviously, the statement given is just restating the conclusion as a premise. It only revolves on one idea.

    X. Accident
    (Sweeping Generalization)

    “Since the Bible says, ‘Thou shall not kill,’ it would be wrong to exterminate the termites in City Hall.” –R. Burton

    The statement “Thou shall not kill” doesn’t apply to all who are living beings. It doesn’t generally mean that those who are living can’t be killed. It is only applied to the highest creation of God which is man.

    XI. Fallacy of Equivocation

    All elephants are animals and Henri is an elephant, and Henri is a small elephant; therefore Henri is a small animal.

    The first statement already implies a fallacy because it doesn’t necessarily mean that all the animals are regarded as elephants.

    XII. Accent
    I resent that letter.
    This sentence could mean either that one sent the letter again, or that one has a feeling of resentment towards it. If you concluded, falsely, on the basis of the sentence, that the speaker sent the letter again, then you would have committed a fallacy of accent.

    XIII. Amphiboly

    “Although you have said you will give me no more of your time, I’ll not ask for any more of your time; I’ll just ask for the amount of time you have already given once more.” –McCain

    One who will be able to read this maybe confused because of the words’ arrangement in the statement.

    XIV. Composition
    Sodium and Chloride are both dangerous to humans. Therefore any combination of sodium and chloride will be dangerous to humans.

    We all know that Sodium Chloride is the chemical name for the compound salt and salt is very essential for human survival. Though individually they are poisonous, it is not right to conclude that when they are combined as one it is poisonous.

    XV. False Dilemma

    “It all depends on whether he is strong enough or not. Either he’ll kill her himself,” – she turned to meet my gaze again, glaring – “which would really irritate me, Edward, not to mention what it would do to you – “ she faced Jasper again, “or she’ll be one of us someday.” –Alice Cullen, Chapter 4, Midnight Sun by Stephenie Meyer

    It doesn’t mean that if he is not strong enough he will kill himself.

    XVI. Division

    The universe has existed for fifteen billion years.
    The universe is made out of molecules.
    Therefore, each of the molecules in the universe has existed for fifteen billion years.
    –Thomas Mautner (Editor), A Dictionary of Philosophy (Blackwell, 1996)—

    The universe is taken as a unit but not individually. Its subparts like the molecules is not the main subject in the statement but the whole universe itself.

    XVII. Slippery Slope

    “You should not date him because you might fall in love with him and later might get hurt, then, you’ll go back to me and ask me why I set up him to you.” (One Tree Hill)

    The possibility that the speaker gave in this statement is only one of the many that might occur. Thus, if she dated him, she can also be happy and thank her for setting them up or there are other events that could lead when she would date the guy.

    XVIII. Red Herring Fallacy

    “You may claim that the death penalty is an ineffective deterrent against crime — but what about the victims of crime? How do you think surviving family members feel when they see the man who murdered their son kept in prison at their expense? Is it right that they should pay for their son’s murderer to be fed and housed?”

    The speaker is diverting the listeners from the main issue which is about the death penalty.

    XIX. False Analogy

    “Just as in time the gentle rain can wear down the tallest mountains, so, in human life, all problems can be solved by patience and quiet persistence.”

    It may have been proven that the rain can wear down the tallest mountains but it can’t be concluded that it can also be applied in solving human problems.

    XX. Straw Man Fallacy

    “Your argument is absurd because you want to eliminate private corporations from manufacturing.”

    The speaker attacked the argument of the person through pointing out irrelevant issues.

  11. Mr. Odchimar, our comments may be too long so they need moderation. We do not know what else to do but we already posted ours last March 22 and now, a second one this March 25 since you did not see ours yet. We’ll post ours again here, part by part.

  12. INFORMAL FALLACIES

    Fallacies of Relevance

    R1 Argumentum ad Ignorantiam
    (Appeal to Ignorance)

    “When I was a kid, my father told me there was no such thing as monsters; my nightmares were just figments of my imagination. As I got older, I had to wonder, was he lying to me… or just wrong?”

    – Harry Dresden
    “The Dresden Files” (2007) {Birds of a Feather (#1.1)}

    The argument is false because it does not follow that if anyone had not yet seen a monster, it does not necessarily mean that there is no such thing. That is, what the father had said to his son in the story. It is not proper to argue that something is not true if it is not yet proven to be false.

    R2 Argumentum ad Verecundiam
    (Appeal to Inappropriate Authority)

    “To kill an infidel, the Pope has said, is not murder; it is the path to Heaven.”

    – Priest exhorting Crusaders
    “Kingdom of Heaven” (2005)

    It does not follow even if the Pope had said that such killing is a path to Heaven, it does not necessarily mean that it is the proper thing to do. Appealing to authority does not make up the truth of the argument. The one who quoted the argument made an excuse of defending his point by immediately projecting the defense from an inappropriate authority.

    R3 Argumentum ad Hominem
    (Attack on the Person)

    “The weak must be sacrificed for the greater good. Something your father could never understand. He could have saved Krypton if he wasn’t such a feeble-minded pacifist.”

    – Zor-El
    “Smallville” (2001) {Blue (#7.8)}

    The argument is false because it became a direct attack on the person, and did not focus on the claims being made or the merits of the argument. It did not show any proof or did not reason out but instead, discredited the opponent.

    R4 Argumentum ad Populum
    (Appeal to Popular Prejudice)

    “How can so many witnesses be wrong, he must be the killer.”

    – Fox Crime

    More commonly known as the “bandwagon thinking,” argumentum ad populum is the fallacy committed when conclusions are drawn from popularly held beliefs.
    The example is false because one of the jurers quickly assumed that the suspected killer was guilty because of the quantity of people that said he was who they saw, without looking at proof or evidence to back up the assumption.

    R5 Argumentum ad Baculum
    (Appeal to Force)

    “You should believe God exists because, if you don’t, when you die you will be judged and God will send you to Hell for all of eternity. You don’t want to be tortured in Hell, do you? If not, it is a safer bet to believe in God than to not believe.”

    This is a simplified form of Pascal’s Wager, an argument often heard from some Christians. A god is not made any more likely to exist simply because someone says that if we don’t believe in it, then we will be harmed in the end. Similarly, belief in a god is not made any more rational simply because we are afraid of going to some hell.. By appealing to our fear of pain and our desire to avoid suffering, the above argument is committing a fallacy of relevance.

    R6 Argumentum Misericordiam
    (Appeal to Pity)

    The law requires everyone to follow the speed limit and other traffic regulations, but in Suffolk County, exceptions should be made for cops and their families, police union officials say..
    Police Benevolent Association president Jeff Frayler said Thursday it has been union policy to discourage Suffolk police officers from issuing tickets to fellow officers, regardless of where they work.
    “Police officers have discretion whenever they stop anyone, but they should particularly extend that courtesy in the case of other police officers and their families,” Frayler said in a brief telephone interview Thursday. “It is a professional courtesy.”
    The rule in this example is the speed limit, which has exceptions. For instance, it is legally permissible for on-duty police officers, driving their official vehicles, to break the speed limit in pursuit of criminals or to answer emergency calls. However, off-duty officers driving private cars have no more reason to break the speed limit than do other citizens. The mere fact of being a police officer is an irrelevant characteristic rather than an exception to the law. A fortiori, it is an irrelevant characteristic to be a family member of a police officer. So, it is a case of special pleading to argue that off-duty police officers and their families should not be ticketed in circumstances in which a civilian would be.

    R7 Ignorantio Elenchi
    (Missing the Point)

    “The 52 former hostages are seen as national heroes. I consider them survivors. A hero is one who is admired for his achievements and qualities. Therefore, the true heroes are those servicemen who volunteered for the failed rescue mission.”

    – Irene Coyne
    “Letters” Time (Vol 117, No. 7), 4

    Ms. Coyne is arguing that the servicemen who failed to rescue the hostages are heroes for the reason that heroes are admired for their achievements and qualities. For this premiss to be relevant to the conclusion, we must assume that the servicemen who failed are admired for their achievements and qualities. If this assumption were to be supported by further reasons, the ignoratio elenchi need not have occurred.
    In other words, in order to determine relevance, we would ask Ms. Coyne, “Would those servicemen be true heroes if they had not volunteered, and if they would have rescued the hostages?” Doubtless, she would agree that they still would be considered heroes; hence, the fallacy of ignoratio elenchi occurs. (Note how this ignoratio elenchi is coupled with ad populum consideration.)

  13. Fallacies of Presumption

    P1 Complex Question

    (Sees a suspicious person wearing a coat staring at them) “Who sent you?”
    – Bourne Identity

    It is false because he completely skipped or assumed the conclusion to the questions “Are you after me?,” “What are you doing there?,” “Could he possibly be an ally?” and “Is he involved in the situation i am in or just a regular bi stander.”
    A complex question is a fallacy committed when a question is asked in a way where some truths are assumed in order to ask the question.

    P2 False Cause
    (Non Causa Pro Causa)

    The Girl: You know why the sky is blue?
    Kyun-woo: Because the reflection from the sunshine causes…
    The Girl: Wrong! It’s to make me happy. I wanted it to be blue, so it’s blue. You know why fire is hot? It’s all for me. I wanted it to be hot, so it’s hot. You know why we have four seasons here in Korea?
    Kyun-woo: For you?
    The Girl: Correct.

    “My Sassy Girl” [Korean]

    The false cause is the fallacy committed when an argument mistakenly attempt to establish a causal connection. This is an example of false cause because when it is sunny, the skies are blue. But when it rains, the skies turn black. Not because he is happy or he just wants the sky to be blue. If so, then when it rains but he is happy then the sky will still be blue?

    P3 Petitio Principii
    (Begging the Question)

    Moses: Who are you?
    God: I am that I am.

    “The Prince of Egypt”

    Petitio principii is, in general, the fallacy of assuming as a premise a statement which has the same meaning as the conclusion. One kind of Petitio Principii is a repetition of the same word/s in the same order in both premise and conclusion. When Moses asked God who he is, God answered he is what he is. It’s like, okay He is what He is, but still who is He? The reply of God wasn’t clear to Moses.

    P4 Accident
    (Sweeping Generalization)

    “You’ve already stolen my heart…”
    – Marquis de Sade
    “Quills”

    Accident is the fallacy of applying a general rule to a particular case whose special circumstances render the rule inapplicable. According to the Ten Commandments, thou shall not steal. In the example above, she said that someone has stolen her heart, but that doesn’t disobey the Ten Commandments because that someone didn’t literally stole her heart.

    P5 Converse Accident
    (Hasty Generalization)

    Michele Slatalla wrote about needing to talk with her 58-year-old mother about going into a nursing home, “While I admire Slatalla’s concern for her parents, and agree that as one approaches 60 it is wise to make some long-term plans, I hardly think that 58 is the right age at which to talk about a retirement home unless there are some serious health concerns. In this era, when people are living to a healthy and ripe old age, Slatalla is jumping the gun. My 85-year-old mother power-walks two miles each day, drives her car (safely), climbs stairs, does crosswords, reads the daily paper and could probably beat Slatalla at almost anything.”
    – Nancy Edwards
    “Letters to the Editor” {Time (6/26/00)}

    This is the fallacy of generalizing about a population based upon a sample which is too small to be representative. If the population is heterogeneous, then the sample needs to be large enough to represent the population’s variability. With a completely homogeneous population, a sample of one is sufficiently large, so it is impossible to put an absolute lower limit on sample size. Rather, sample size depends directly upon the variability of the population: the more heterogeneous a population, the larger the sample required. For instance, people tend to be quite variable in their political opinions, so that public opinion polls need fairly large samples to be accurate.

    P6 False Dilemma

    “Gerda Reith is convinced that superstition can be a positive force. “It gives you a sense of control by making you think you can work out what’s going to happen next,” she says. “And it also makes you feel lucky. And to take a risk or to enter into a chancy situation, you really have to believe in your own luck. In that sense, it’s a very useful way of thinking, because the alternative is fatalism, which is to say, ‘Oh, there’s nothing I can do.’ At least superstition makes people do things.””

    – David Newnham
    “Hostages to Fortune”
    The problem with this fallacy is not formal, but is found in its disjunctive—”either-or”—premiss: an argument of this type is fallacious when its disjunctive premise is fallaciously supported.

  14. Distraction Fallacies

    D1 Red Herring
    (Missing the Point)
    “White people always wanting their respect like they deserve it for free. I saw white cops shoot my friend in the back just for reaching into his pocket, I saw white cops break into my house and took my father for no reason, except that they can because they‘re white. That is why I hate white people.”
    – Eva Benitez
    “Freedom Writers” (2007)
    This quote also showed the fallacy of distraction when Eva was talking about respect, then she again told the Mrs. Gruwell that white people could do anything.

    D2 Slippery Slope
    “I saw white cops break into my house and too my father for no reason, except that they can because they’re white”
    It does not necessarily mean that you should be white to be able to take people out of their house for no reasons.

    – Eva Benitez
    “Freedom Writers” (2007)

    D3 False Analogy

    Peter Pan: If you’re not Wendy, then who are you?
    Jane: I’m her daughter, Jane.
    Peter Pan: Then if you’re Wendy’s daughter, you’re gonna love it here.

    “Return to Never Land” (2002)

    It is a bad analogy that falls in a wrong conclusion because Wendy and Jane are two different persons and that Wendy and Jane may have a different likes and dislikes.

    D4 Straw Man

    “If you are a skeptic about global warming and other alleged environmental terrors, you care nothing for future generations and might also be in the pay of Big Oil.”

    (http://www.samizdata.net/blog/archives/2007/04/examples_of_str.html)
    This is not a start of an argument, but an attempt to shout debate down. It betrays the fact that Greenery is becoming a religion with its own notions of heresy.

    D5 False Dilemma

    (to Sasuke)“In order to gain something you must throw something away, Instead of gaining power with the seal you will be bound to Orochimaru. If so, you can gain even greater splendid power.”

    – Tayuya
    “Naruto Manga Series”

    It is a false dilemma because you can’t gain something if you throw something away just to get it. If Sasuke gains the power of the seal, he will be under Orochimaru’s influence following Orochimaru’s every order like a puppet. Even though, Sasuke is to become powerful he can only use his power under the order of Orochimaru.

  15. Is everything alright already sir?

  16. Fallacies of Ambiguity

    A1 Equivocation

    “Lack of brains hinders research.”

    This headline is a humorous boobytrap because the word “brains” has two meanings: the organ inside the skull, or the intelligence associated with that organ.

    – Bob Levey
    “Headlines That You Just Have to Hang On To” {The Washington Post (11/22/2002)}

    A2 Amphiboly

    “Teenagers shouldn’t be allowed to drive. It’s getting too dangerous on the streets.”

    (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amphibology)

    Amphiboly is committed when one of the statements in an argument has more than one plausible meaning, because of the loose or awkward way in which the words in that statement have been combined. Its conclusion is not supported because of the wrong interpretation of a syntactically ambiguous statement.
    The example could be taken to mean the teenagers will be in danger, or that they will cause the danger.

  17. A3 Accent

    Tom argues: Joe is a good tennis player.
    Therefore, Joe is ‘good’, that is to say a ‘morally’ good person.

    (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fallacy#Verbal_fallacies)

    Accent fallacy is committed when a shift of meaning arises within an argument as a consequence of changes in the emphases given to its words or parts. That is when arguer changes the emphasis of words or parts thereby changing also the meaning of the said words or parts.
    Here, the problem is that the word good has different meanings, which is to say that it is an ambiguous word. In the premise, Tom says that Joe is good at some particular activity, in this case tennis. In the conclusion, Tom states that Joe is a morally good person. These are clearly two different senses of the word “good”. The premise might be true but the conclusion can still be false: Joe might be the best tennis player in the world but a rotten person morally. However, it is not legitimate to infer he is a bad person on the ground there has been a fallacious argument on the part of Tom. Nothing concerning Joe’s moral qualities is to be inferred from the premise. Appropriately, since it plays on an ambiguity, this sort of fallacy is called the fallacy of equivocation, that is, equating two incompatible terms or claim.

  18. A4 Composition

    “Cats are mammals.”

    (http://instruct.westvalley.edu/lafave/composition_and_division.htm)

    Composition fallacy is committed when (1) arguer reasons mistakenly from the attributes of a part to the attributes of the whole and (2) arguer reasons mistakenly from the attributes of an individual member of some collection to the attributes of the totality of that collection. It consists in taking words or phrases as a unit when they should be taken separately.
    In the statement above, the predicate is “are mammals”. Note that the noun “mammals” in the predicate is also a general term denoting a class. The statement “Cats are mammals” says that the class of cats is a subclass of the class of mammals. Or, all the members of the denotation of “cats” are also members of the denotation of “mammals.”

    A5 Division
    “White people always wanting their respect like they deserve it for free. I saw white cops shoot my friend in the back just for reaching into his pocket, I saw white cops break into my house and took my father for no reason, except that they can because they‘re white. That is why I hate white people.”
    – Eva Benitez
    “Freedom Writers” (2007)
    This quote shows that Eva grouped all the white people together as people who could do anything including their teacher except the fact that their teacher was not one of them.

  19. Sir, we had found out that each comment should have only one hyperlink and having more than one will make a post readable only to the one who posted it.
    You can see that in our previous posts, comments with hyperlinks are separated or else it will not be viewed by others.

    We hope for your kind consideration regarding this matter.

    Thank you.

Leave a comment