www.byjusexamprep.

com

1
www.byjusexamprep.com

Informal Fallacy
An informal fallacy is an argument whose stated premises fail to support their proposed conclusion. It
primarily deals with the logic of the meaning of language. The word “informal” does not here mean it
is inferior, casual or improper. It only means that our focus is not on the form of the argument, but on
the meaning of the argument. An informal fallacy involves such things as: the misuse of language such
as words or grammar, misstatements of fact or opinion, misconceptions due to underlying
presuppositions, or just plain illogical sequences of thought.

Types of Informal Fallacy

1. Ad Ignorantiam (Appeal to ignorance)

This fallacy assumes that the absence of evidence for a viewpoint is sufficient to show its falsity and,
conversely, that the absence of evidence for a position's untruth is sufficient to necessitate its truth.
This is a relatively straightforward fallacy because we cannot conclude something is true just because
there is no evidence to support it, and vice versa. The absence of evidence reflects a limitation in our
understanding, not a feature of the claim itself.
For instance:
• Claiming that extraterrestrials exist simply because there is no evidence against them would be
ignoring the possibility that there is also no independent, conclusive proof of their existence.
When there is no supporting evidence on either side, it makes sense to hold off on making any
decisions.

• “No one can actually prove that God exists; therefore, God does not exist”.
This is a prime example of Ad Ignorantiam. Here, refuting the existence of god just because
there is no scientist proof is futile and explains the ignorance. Science is evolving subject so just
because no proof is established currently doesn’t mean existence can’t be proven in the future.

2. Fallacy of Equivocation

Equivocation is used when a word, phrase, or sentence is used deliberately to confuse deceive, or
mislead its saying one thing but actually saying something else.
Example 1:
The priest told me I should have faith.
I have faith that my son will do well in school this year.

2
www.byjusexamprep.com

Therefore, the priest should be happy with me.

In the above example, the term “faith” is used by the priest in a religious sense of believing in God
without sufficient evidence, which is different from having “faith” in your son in which years of good
past performance leads to the “faith” you might have in your son.

Example 2:
The end of a thing is its perfection.
Death is the end of life.
So, death is the perfection of life.
Here, “end” can mean “goal” or “termination,” so the conclusion could be that the goal of life is
perfection, or that life is perfected only when it is terminated.
Aside from metaphysical reasons, the argument is only ostensibly sound because at least one of the
premises or conclusions is untrue due to the change in context and meaning (or, implausible).

3. Argumentum ad populum (Appeal to popular opinion)

Ad populum are those prepositions which are accepted just because all other people agree on it.
For example,
“Everyone drives over the speed limit, so it should not be against the law”.
In the above example, Over- speed is a serious traffic violation even if everyone drives over the speed
limit. In this statement, the person assumes that driving over the speed limit is not against the law just
because everyone is doing the same.

3
www.byjusexamprep.com

4. Ad verecundiam (Appeal to authority)

These are not independent arguments, but rather justifications based on an appeal to authority. We
recognise it when the speaker begins to list well-known "authorities" instead of providing his or her
own arguments, admitting their own inability to draw the appropriate conclusions—as if to say, "I
admit my ignorance; there are others who know better than I on this issue."

5. The Hasty Generalization Fallacy

This fallacy is made whenever a conclusion is drawn without enough evidence to back it up. In other
words, while the data used to support the conclusion may be accurate, it is not always reflective of the
majority. For precisely this reason, several well-known generalizations—like "all Brazilians are football
fans," "atheists are immoral people," and "the ends justify the means"—are unwarranted. Such
generalisations cannot be supported by a small number of confirming examples since they are based
on an insufficient number of cases.

We frequently base our worldviews on such broad assumptions. In reality, it is difficult to resist doing
so! However, that does not imply that we should accept such generalisations without critically
examining them and looking for sufficient evidence to back them up.

Example:
“Our neighborhood's downtown park was recently destroyed by several teenagers. Teenagers are so
destructive and careless”.

4
www.byjusexamprep.com

6. The Strawman Fallacy

This fallacy is quite common. The strongest interpretation of an argument should always be preferred,
according to the charity principle in argumentation analysis. The straw man fallacy, which entails
reducing an argument to a weaker version of it merely in order to refute it, is a clear violation of this
principle. As a result, the argument loses some of its initial power and becomes easily debunked when
reduced to a caricature. Because a straw man is simpler to discredit than a real man, this fallacy gets
its name.
The argument that vegans should appreciate plant life just as much as they respect animal life is one
that some vegan campaigners allege their opponents frequently make. Its credibility is not lessened by
the fact that vegans may legitimately argue that this is a distortion of their own viewpoint. In contrast
to the ad hominem fallacy, the straw man fallacy does not make an effort to discredit the argument by
personally criticising the subject.

7. Fallacy of Slippery Slope

An argument that predicts a string of cause-and-effect scenarios without providing any logical support
for its premises or conclusions is said to be using the slippery slope fallacy. It asserts that if one
occurrence takes place, it will trigger a series of events that will finally result in a decision.

In essence, if A (the beginning event) occurs, then E (the last event in the series of claims) will
unavoidably take place. In a slippery slope argument, it is asserted that A will certainly result in B, C, D,
and E.

Due to the fact that the premises or statements in this kind of argument do not always logically follow
from one another, it is a fallacy.

Example:

“I'll miss my alarm in the morning if I stay up beyond midnight. I will then be late for work, and if I am
late for work, I will be disciplined. If that occurs, nobody will believe I take my job seriously, and I'll

5
www.byjusexamprep.com

become the company's running joke. If the firm thinks I'm a joke, I won't get promoted, and I can forget
about my goal of becoming a junior partner”.

In this case, the argument makes the claim that staying up past midnight will have a number of
repercussions, each of which is based on a particular incident. Here, staying up beyond midnight starts
a chain of events that eventually results in giving up the aspiration of becoming a junior partner.

This argument is false since none of these occurrences must necessarily lead to the conclusions drawn
from the series.

8. The Middle Ground Fallacy

A typical form of logical fallacy, or a mistake in reasoning that undermines an argument, is the notion
that the best course of action must lay halfway between two conflicting viewpoints. This fallacy
assumes that a compromise between two extreme conflicting points is always true. It is also known as
‘golden mean fallacy’ and ‘argument from moderation’.

9. Red herring Fallacy

A red herring is a logical fallacy in which pertinent information is accompanied by irrelevant

information with the intent of drawing attention away from the pertinent information. This could be
done on purpose or accidentally.

6
www.byjusexamprep.com

Red herrings are frequently used in literature, television, and film.

For instance, a suspicious character could be used as a red herring in a mystery book to lead the reader
to suspect that he or she committed the crime when, in reality, the character's purpose is to draw
attention away from the evidence that points to the real criminal.

Logical Form:

Argument A is presented by person 1.

Person 2 introduces argument B.
Argument A is abandoned.

Example:

Mike: It is morally wrong to cheat on your spouse, why on earth would you have done that?
Ken: But what is morality exactly?
Mike: It’s a code of conduct shared by cultures.
Ken: But who creates this code?
…..

10. Irrelevant Conclusion (Ignoratio elenchi)

The ignoratio elenchi fallacy makes a valid point but is off base. The claims and conclusion, while
theoretically sound, do not address the issue at hand.

Examples:

• “Being so tranquil and adorable, hippopotamuses cannot be harmful to people” -

Demonstrating a pointless conclusion. It's also fascinating to note that among all animals,
hippos kill the most people in Africa.
• “Although the President's healthcare plans may be well-liked, he is actually a Nazi in secret,
and this should undoubtedly be looked into”. - There is no connection between the tax code
and if the president is a Nazi.

7
www.byjusexamprep.com

11. Appeal to pity (Argumentum ad misericordiam)

This occurs when a speaker uses an audience's emotions to force support for a conclusion without
providing evidence to support its validity. The goal of appealing to pity is to distract and sway an
audience by appealing to their emotions.

One instance of an appeal to pity is when a criminal defendant uses a cane or walker to make
themselves appear frailer in front of a jury. Although it is not a defence on the merits of the case, the
appearance of infirmity is meant to influence the jury's verdict.

Example:

"Professor, I am really sorry for the poor quality of this paper. I want to meet with you to talk about
how I can perform better on our upcoming project."

12. Bandwagon Fallacy

The bandwagon fallacy makes the assumption that something is true (or right or nice) just because
other people concur with it. The fallacy asserts that you should think a certain way if everyone else
does, in other words.

One issue with this line of thinking is that just because something is widely accepted doesn't indicate
that it is factually justifiable. People's opinions can be erroneous, clouded, misled, or even
purposefully irrational, therefore utilising them to support an argument is problematic.

Examples:

• "Almost everyone at my school will be at the party Friday night. It must be a popular thing to
do."
• "Almost everyone at my school will be at the party Friday night. It must be the right thing to
do."

8
www.byjusexamprep.com

13. Argument directed to the person (Argumentum ad hominem)

This fallacy involves considering the person's argument rather than attacking them personally. As a
result, rather than a flaw being discovered with the argument itself, the speaker's personality or
personal circumstances are brought up to invalidate his or her views.

Example:

Person 1: I promise to balance the budget in my first year as the finance minister.

Person 2: She promises to balance the budget, but she couldn’t be smart enough because she never
ran a business.

14. Sunk Cost Fallacy

When someone continues to accomplish something because of the work they have already
expended, regardless of whether the further expenses outweigh the possible benefits, this is known
as the sunk cost fallacy. Any past costs that can no longer be recovered are referred to in economics
as "sunk costs."

Say, for instance, that you decide a TV show isn't for you after watching the first six episodes. Your
"sunk cost" is those six episodes. An example of a sunk cost fallacy would be choosing to finish
watching something despite having already dedicated almost six hours of your life to it.

15. Appeal to power or threat of force (Argumentum ad baculum)

Using physical force or any other form of threat, the ad baculum is a type of intimidation that makes
someone feel compelled to accept the conclusion, regardless of whether it is true. One does
absolutely give up rationality when someone threatens to use force, power, or any other form of
intimidation instead of debating and disputing. This might be seen as the ultimate fallacy and the
most extreme attempt to impose a conclusion without providing evidence for it.

16. Begging the question (Petitio principii)

This fallacy occurs when the premises of the argument presume the truth of the very conclusion they
are intended to support, such that accepting the premises requires also accepting the conclusion.
This explains the meaning of the Latin term "petition of the principles," which refers to situations

9
www.byjusexamprep.com

where the conclusion serves as a foundation for itself. Even though the premises of the argument are
ultimately true, and the argument is unquestionably correct, such arguments are fallacious since they
are unhelpful in proving the validity of the conclusion.

Example:

For instance, it begs the question when someone asserts that males are superior to women in logical
reasoning because men are more rational than women. Now, if being logical just means being
rational, then what has been said is just that men are more logical because they are more logical.
Thus, the argument essentially presupposes the very point it is making.

10
www.byjusexamprep.com

SOME PREVIOUS YEAR QUESTIONS:

1. “Everyone is going to the party. You should go too.” This inference commits which kind of fallacy?
A. Ad Populum
B. Equivocation
C. Ad Verecundiam
D. Ad Ignorantiam

Ans: A
Ad populum are those prepositions which are accepted just because all other people agree on it. In
this case, just because everyone is going to the party, makes you liable to go the party.

2. A fallacy in which an opponent’s position is depicted as being more extreme or unreasonable than
is justified by what was actually asserted is called
A. Argumentum ad Baculum
B. The Red Herring
C. Argumentum ad Hominem
D. Straw Man

Ans: D
A straw man is an informal fallacy in which an opponent’s position is depicted as being more extreme
or unreasonable than is justified by what was actually asserted.
For example, the person committing the straw man fallacy highlights the most extreme position of the
opposing side.
Opposing argument: Teens should be taught about contraception methods so they can practice safe
sex should they choose to have intercourse.
Straw man argument: Proponents of sex education want to give kids license to have sex with no
consequences.

3. The inference “A mouse is an animal. Therefore, a large mouse is a large animal” commits which one
of the following fallacies?
A. Straw man
B. Slippery slope
C. Equivocation
D. Fallacy of composition

Ans: C

Equivocation is used when a word, phrase, or sentence is used deliberately to confuse deceive, or
mislead its saying one thing but actually saying something else. In this case, statement is given-mouse
is animal. But it doesn’t mean large mouse is large animal. It is done to confuse the people.

11
www.byjusexamprep.com

4. “In this hospital, some nurses don’t wear white dress, some doctors have private practice and
medicines prescribed are of high cost. Therefore, treatment in this hospital is of poor quality”. What
fallacy does this argument make?
A. Fallacy of composition
B. Slippery slope
C. Fallacy of accident
D. Fallacy of division

Ans: B

The above example is slippery slope fallacy. A slippery slope is a logical fallacy in which a party asserts
that a relatively small first step which leads to a chain of related events culminating in some significant
effect. In this context, problems of hospitals such as nurses don’t wear white dress or prescription of
expensive medicines are mentioned to explain that hospital is of poor quality.

12