This document discusses different types of fallacies that violate the relevance criterion for a good argument. It defines two categories: 1) Fallacies of irrelevant premise, where the premises do not support the conclusion. Types include genetic fallacy and rationalization. 2) Fallacies of irrelevant appeal, where the argument relies on irrelevant authorities or emotional factors rather than evidence. Common types are appeal to authority, common opinion, force/threat, tradition, self-interest, and manipulation of emotions. Examples are given for each fallacy.
This document discusses different types of fallacies that violate the relevance criterion for a good argument. It defines two categories: 1) Fallacies of irrelevant premise, where the premises do not support the conclusion. Types include genetic fallacy and rationalization. 2) Fallacies of irrelevant appeal, where the argument relies on irrelevant authorities or emotional factors rather than evidence. Common types are appeal to authority, common opinion, force/threat, tradition, self-interest, and manipulation of emotions. Examples are given for each fallacy.
This document discusses different types of fallacies that violate the relevance criterion for a good argument. It defines two categories: 1) Fallacies of irrelevant premise, where the premises do not support the conclusion. Types include genetic fallacy and rationalization. 2) Fallacies of irrelevant appeal, where the argument relies on irrelevant authorities or emotional factors rather than evidence. Common types are appeal to authority, common opinion, force/threat, tradition, self-interest, and manipulation of emotions. Examples are given for each fallacy.
This document discusses different types of fallacies that violate the relevance criterion for a good argument. It defines two categories: 1) Fallacies of irrelevant premise, where the premises do not support the conclusion. Types include genetic fallacy and rationalization. 2) Fallacies of irrelevant appeal, where the argument relies on irrelevant authorities or emotional factors rather than evidence. Common types are appeal to authority, common opinion, force/threat, tradition, self-interest, and manipulation of emotions. Examples are given for each fallacy.
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
Download as docx, pdf, or txt
You are on page 1of 5
CHAPTER 6: FALLACIES THAT Genetic Fallacy
VIOLATE THE RELEVANCE
- Evaluating a thing in terms of its CRITERION earlier context and then carrying over Fallacies that violate the Relevance that evaluation to the thing in the Criterion present, while ignoring relevant - These are fallacies that make appeals changes that may have altered its to factors that are irrelevant to the character in the interim. truth or merit of their conclusions - One who commits this fallacy typically transfers the positive or negative esteem Premise or appeal, when relevant or that he or she has for the thing in its irrelevant: original context or earlier from to the thing in its present form. Relevant Premise / Irrelevant Premise / - Sometimes committed by religious Appeal Appeal As to acceptance to the conclusion leaders and others who forbid certain Provides some Provides no practices on the basis of their supposed reason to believe connection and has origins. and has bearing on no bearing on the - Exhibits a pattern of reasoning that fails the merit of the merit of the to meet the relevance criterion of a conclusion conclusion good argument – that the premises must have a bearing on the truth or value of 2 Categories of Fallacies that Violate the the claim in question. Relevance Criterion: - Example: “I wouldn’t vote for Don Reichard for anything. You see, I grew 1. Fallacies of irrelevant premise up with him. We went to grade school 2. Fallacies of irrelevant appeal together. He was just one big ‘goof-off.’ Fallacies of Irrelevant Premise You couldn’t depend on him for anything. I shudder to think of his being -A fallacy in which the arguers set forth governor of any state in which I live.” reasons to try to lead us to a point of view, but then draw a conclusion other Rationalization than the one that the reasons actually - Using plausible-sounding but usually support. fake reasons to justify a particular Example: Evaluating a thing in terms position that is held on other, less of its earlier context, ignoring changes respectable grounds that may have altered its character. - The stated premises have little or no Types of Fallacies of Irrelevant Premise: relationship to the conclusion since they are not the real reasons for the 1. Genetic Fallacy conclusion drawn. 2. Rationalization - A kind of dishonest substitute for good 3. Drawing the Wrong Conclusion reasoning. 4. Using the Wrong Reasons - Uses premises that make the arguer’s reveal the sources of their questionable position or action appear information.” to be rationally respectable. The weight of evidence in this - Example: “I didn’t do well on the Law argument supports the view that School Admissions Test. You see, I just newspaper reporters perform a don’t do very well on tests. Tests just very useful and important service don’t show my real ability. Besides, the for their readers; however, it does day before I took the LSAT, I had some not support the claim that the really bad news from home. I’ll do courts have been unfair to better next time” reporters. The person is trying to give Using the Wrong Reasons plausible-sounding reasons for his weak performance on the - Attempting to support a claim with LSAT, but the reasons sound reasons other than the reasons hollow. appropriate to the claim - Reverse of the fallacy of drawing the Drawing the Wrong Conclusion wrong conclusion - Drawing a conclusion other than the - This fallacy is committed when the one supported by the evidence arguer attempts to defend a particular presented in the argument. conclusion and uses evidence that does - Also known as the fallacy of missing not support the same. the point - Commonly committed in a political - The argument’s conclusion misses the debate, particularly when one is main thrust of the evidence provided arguing against a program or policy. - In some cases, the wrong conclusion - Example: “Certain population groups might be drawn because of should not be targeted by tobacco carelessness in the formation of the advertising. Tobacco has been shown argument, but in most cases it is drawn to cause cancer, it is an expensive because of the subtle, perhaps even habit, and it is offensive to family unconscious, prejudices of the arguer. members, associates, and others who - Example: “Reporters keep the public have to put up with the smoker’s informed, and we all know that a well- smoke.” informed public is necessary to bring The arguer started with the about any semblance of justice. conclusion and was clearly Besides, reporters keep public officials attempting to support that and others ‘honest’ by digging out the conclusion—with the wrong facts behind their claims and exposing reasons. The reasons given may them when they don’t tell the truth or all be true and good reasons not when they engage in questionable to smoke; however, they have practices. Therefore, I think that the very little or nothing to do with courts are grossly unfair to newspaper the issue here. reporters when they force them to go to prison just because they won’t when it comes to deciding the best curriculum of the school.” Fallacies of Irrelevant Appeal While members of the student - A number of fallacious arguments government may be relevant attempt to support a claim by making authorities on student welfare, questionable appeals to the authority of they are not relevant authorities other people or to emotional factors, on curricular matters. none of which are relevant or provide Appeal to Common Opinion support for the truth or merit of a claim at issue. - Urges the acceptance of a position simply on the grounds that a large Types of Fallacies of Irrelevant Appeal: number of people accept it or urging the 1. Appeal to Irrelevant Authority rejection of a position on the grounds 2. Appeal to Common Opinion that very few people accept it. 3. Appeal to Force or Threat - Also known as the bandwagon fallacy 4. Appeal to Tradition and consensus gentium. 5. Appeal to Self-Interest - Suggests that an idea or action must be 6. Manipulation of Emotions true or good because everyone is accepting it or jumping on it Appeal to Irrelevant Authority - An argument that supports a conclusion - Attempts to support a claim by by using the number of people that appealing to the judgment of: accept or reject it 1. One who is not an authority in the - Example: “Marijuana can’t be all field, wrong. According to a recent Gallup 2. An unidentified authority, or survey published in yesterday’s Wall 3. An authority who is likely to be Street Journal, more than 60 percent of biased. the adult American population sees - Occurs most frequently in the form of a nothing wrong with it.” transfer of an authority’s competence in The benefits or dangers of one field to another in which the smoking marijuana cannot be authority is not competent. ascertained by taking a poll. - If an arguer appeals to an unqualified, Appeal to Force or Threat unidentified, or biased authority to support a particular thesis, then he or - Attempts to persuade others of a she has appealed to a factor that position by threatening them with an provides no support for the conclusion undesirable state of affairs instead of - Example: “I think that we should presenting evidence for one’s view. adopt this new curricular proposal. - Happens when an arguer tries to force After all, it has been unanimously another to accept a particular belief or a endorsed by the college’s student course of action by threatening him government. The people who are with some undesirable action. entrusted with running the student body - Example: “A local businesswoman should know what they’re talking about reminds the editor of a local newspaper that she spends a lot of advertising self-interest, when a more important dollars in the paper and would prefer issue is at stake. that the story concerning her recent - The effect that a proposed public policy arrest for drunk driving not appear in might have on one’s personal life it.” should have no bearing on whether it is This is an appeal to threat. The a good idea. businesswoman gives no reasons - Example: “Rebecca, I would have why the story should not appear in through that you would be actively the paper other than the implied supporting an affirmative action threat that the newspaper will program here at the college. Because experience a loss of revenue if it you’re a woman, you of all people does. should see the merit of using every means available to hire women to work Appeal to Tradition in areas that have traditionally been - Attempts to persuade others of a point dominated by men”. of view by appealing to their feelings of Manipulation of Emotions reverence or respect for a tradition instead of to evidence, especially when - Attempts to persuade others to accept a a more important principle or issue is at position by exploiting their emotions stake. instead of presenting evidence for the - Refers to the emotional attachments to position. the past as basis for the conclusion. - Sometimes called playing to the - The comfortable or warm feelings that gallery. we may have for a particular traditional - 5 Types: way of doing things may be one reason 1. Appeal to pity – Attempts to we revere it, but such feelings are not a persuade others of a position by reason for regarding the tradition as the appealing to their sympathy instead best way of doing things, especially of to relevant evidence when a more when a more important principle may important principle or issue is at be at stake. stake. - Example: “Virginia Military Institute 2. Use of flattery – engages in should never have allowed women to excessive praise of others in order enroll. Ever since Stonewall Jackson, to persuade them of one’s view VMI has been an all-male school. My instead of presenting evidence for dad graduated there and he would turn the position in question. over in his grave if he knew that women 3. Assigning guilt by association – are now allowed to go to VMI.” used to manipulate an opponent into accepting one’s view by pointing Appeal to Self-Interest out that the opposing view is held - Urges an opponent to accept or reject a by those with negative esteem or by particular position by appealing solely people or groups that the opponent to his or her personal circumstance or does not like or usually disagrees with. 4. Appeal to group loyalty – Not only do we sometimes have to abandon our loyalty to one group for our loyalty to a more important group, but sometimes we must abandon our loyalty to any particular group in favor of a more important consideration involving all groups. 5. Appeal to shame – Manipulators try to force support for their position by trying to make us feel shame when we have no reason to because we have done nothing wrong or inappropriate. - Example: “Brad, I really think that you ought to take Nicole to the spring dance next Friday. She hasn’t had a date all year. In fact, she has never been invited to go to any dance. Have you ever thought what it might be like to sit alone in your room every time there is a campus dance, while all your friends are doing what you’d like to be doing”