research,

Defends a Stand on an these

Issue by Presenting students
will fail
Reasonable Arguments their
subjects.
Supported by Properly Occurs when two ” Have you
or ore points are stopped
Cited Factual Evidences rolled into one cheating on
and the reader is exams?”
Complex expected to
Logical Fallacies Question accept or reject
both at the same
 Logical fallacies are errors in time, when one
reasoning that invalidate an point may be
argument. As a critical thinker you satisfactory
have to identify and examine while the other
fallacies and manipulative is not
language. Occurs when a If you do
treat, instead of not admit
Appeal to reasoning is used that
Types of Fallacies Force to argue evolution is
not real, we
will isolate
FALLACY DESCRIPTION EXAMPLE you from
Occurs when an Either you the group.
arguer presents fully devote Appeal to Pity Occurs when the Please do
his/her yourself to element of pity is not fire me
False Dilemma argument as one company or used instead of for being
of only two you quite. logical reasoning absent all
options despite month; I
the presence of have a sick
multiple mother and
possibilities. a special
Occurs when The writer child to
something is does not support.
instantly talk about Occurs when You can’t
Appeal to concluded to be the unpleasant believe that
Ignorance true just because connection consequences of colonialism
it is not proven between Appeal to believing is bad,
to be false, and the victim’s Consequences something are because if
vice versa. killer and point out to shoe it were,
his sister, that the belief is them we
so there false would not
must be be civilized.
none. Occurs when an Most
Occurs when a If we ban argument is Filipinas
series of computer considered to be want to
increasingly shops, then valid because it have fair
superficial and students Bandwagon is what the skin
Slippery Slope unacceptable will not be majority thinks because
consequences able to do they think
drawn. research. they look
And if they beautiful.
do not have Therefore,
tools for having fair
 skin must when it should not have
be the real be an exception. done that
standard of even when
beauty. you were
Occurs when I cannot being
someone tries to accept your chased by
refute an argument terrorist.
argument by because, It is an Dina saw
Attacking the attacking the unlike me, information cat when
Person character of a you were fallacy that they went
person instead of not states: “since home.
attacking the educated at event A followed Along the
ideas of the Harvard event B, event A wat, they
argument University. Post Hoc must have been crashed
Occurs when the Bill Gates, caused by event into a tree.
argument quotes the co- B.” The black
an expert who’s founder of cat must be
not qualified in Microsoft, the reason
Appeal to the particular recommen why they
Authority subject matter ds the met an
effective accident.
fabric Occurs when the Liver
softening Wrong direction damage
properties Direction between cause leads to
of Downy and effect is alcoholism.
fabric reversed
softener. Occurs when the We were
The authority in Experts explanation for not able to
question is not claim that an event is solve the
Anonymous mentioned or eating reduced to one problem
Authority named peanuts thing when there because of
causes are other factors limited
pimples. Complex which also time, even
Occurs when a Martha, Cause contributed to if all the
sample is not the the event other
significant foreigner groups
enough to from were able
Hasty support a France is to do so.
Generalization generalization very Occurs when an We must
about a impolite. argument which support the
population French is supposed to fight for
people are prove something gender
mean and concludes equality
rude. something else between
Occurs when a Drugs are instead men and
writer assumes like women.
that two massages: Women
concepts that are they make Irrelevant have
False Analogy similar in some you feel Conclusion suffered
ways are also good. enough
similar in other violence at
ways. home.
Occurs when a Jaywalking Violence
general rule is is not against
Accident applied to a allowed, so women
situation, even you should must be
 stopped.
Occurs when the Opponent:
position of the We should Factors on Authenticity and Validity of
opposition is relax the Evidences/Information
twisted so that it law
is easier to governing
refute the allowed
smoking While there is a wealth of information
areas in the found in various sources electronically or
Straw Man city. nonelectronically, you should also keep in mind that
Fallacy: We not all of these pieces of information are accurate,
should not relevant, valid or credible. Hence, it is important to
do so, evaluate sources of information that you plan to
because include in your academic writing venture.
the number
Note: There is always a risk that the sources taken
of smokers
from the Internet or anywhere else have biased or
might
incorrect information, so you have to evaluate and
increase.
filter your sources before using them.
Any argument of If you are
the form: If A is drinking
The following are some of the criteria
true then B is wine, you
assessing whether the source is suitable to use for
true; if B is true have a
academic purposes. The criteria include relevance,
Affirming the therefore A is problem.
authority, currency, contents and location of
Consequent true Therefore,
if you have sources.
a problem, 1. Relevance of the Source
you are
drinking ● How well does the source support your
wine. stand?
Any argument of If you are ● You can check the title, table of
the form: If A is drinking contents, summary, introduction or
true then B is wine, you headings of the text to have a sense of
true; if A is not have a its content.
true then B is not problem.
Denying true Therefore, 2. Authority/Author’s Qualifications
Antecedent if you are
● Is the author’s name identified?
not
drinking ● Is the author’s background, education
wine, you or training related to the topic?
do not have ● If the source does not have an author,
a problem. think twice before using it.
Occurs when Frank is ● Legitimate academic texts must include
argument older than
citations. Citations demonstrate that
contradict one Jake, Jake is
the writer has thoroughly researched
Inconsistency another older than
the topic and is not plagiarizing the
Noli and
material.
Noli is older
than Frank.
3. Currency/Date of Publication
● What is the date of the publication?
Warning: Do not use these kinds of logical fallacies ● In most fields, the data from the older
when you defend your stand. It weakens your
publications may no longer be valid.
arguments.
As much as possible, the date pf
publication should be at most five
years earlier.
4. Contents/Accuracy of Information
● Does the author have a lot of citations
in his or her text and/or bibliography
or works cited section? Presentation of Reasonable
● You do not want to use source that is Arguments and Factual evidences to
disputable, so make sure to verify Defend a Stand
your findings with multiple sources.

5. Location of Sources Guidelines in presentation of reasonable

● Where was the source published? arguments and factual evidences to defend a stand:
Was it published digitally or in print?
C – contains a clear proposition or
● Is it a book, an academic journal or a
statement that must be defended
reputable news source as
www.nytimes.com or A – assess conflicting opinions or
www.economist.com? opposing views on the issues
T – takes a firm stand on the issue
● Does it provide complete publication
L – lists arguments in an organized manner
information such as author/s,
to defend the stand
editor/s, title, date of publication and
publisher? C – consider your audience/reader
● What is the URL of the website?
● Avoid using blogs or personal
Example:
homepage and wiki sites (Wikipedia,
Wiktionary, Wikiquotes)
● If the URL includes the top-level
domain .edu, then that means that it
has been published by an academic
institution such as university
● Common URLs include .gov
(government), .org
(organizations), .com (commercial
sites) and .net (network
infrastructures). In academic writing,
reputable sites are those
with .edu, .gov, .net and .org in URL.

Remember: Aside from claim/argument, you

have to discuss counter arguments. These are
arguments opposing a stand.

Add on: Piece of evidence to strengthen the

author’s claims:

Evidence from surveys, library, research

and experiments.

Evidence from informant interviews (those

who have direct experience related to the
problems/issue.

Evidence from expert interviews.