Examples Of Logical Fallacies In Education

Abstract
This paper offers a brief explanation of the types of fallacies of an argument and an in-depth focus on logical fallacies. This paper will also identify four education-related examples of logical fallacies as well as discussions from each example on how they represent flawed interpretations that facilitate sensible arguments to others. Explanation of Logical Fallacies in Education Research shows that logical fallacies are observed in arguments through three categories: as material content, through misstatement of the facts; in the wording, through incorrect use of terms; or in form, through the use of inappropriate methods of assumption (Fallacy, 2014). Fallacies are also categorized as material, verbal, or formal; whereas the
verbal and formal fallacies are considered logical fallacies (Fallacy, 2014). Through this paper, I will discuss four examples of logical fallacies: appeal to fear fallacy, appeal to novelty fallacy, gambler’s fallacy, and genetic fallacy. For each example I will explain how they represent erroneous reasoning in Education and its effects in accepting such fallacies.
Appeal to Fear Fallacy Appeal to fear is also known as scare tactics or latin for “ad baculum”.
The fallacy occurs when people appeal to an argument due to a sense of fear that something awful might happen if they do not agree with the argument. Creating fear in people to constitute a claim, whether it is advertently or inadvertently, is not a rational reason to believe in the claim; it is not objective or logically supportive. Research demonstrates that in Education, frequently, teachers tend to remind students of the importance of passing tests in order to accomplish future educational and/or working goals and failing to excel on tests will result in negative consequences of failure and inability to accomplish their objectives (Putwain, D. & Best, N., 2012). This fallacy provides erroneous reasoning because by instilling fear as a basis of an argument, the focus of the issue is misled; therefore, the argument becomes
misleading.
Appeal to Novelty Fallacy The appeal to novelty is also known as “newer is better” fallacy.
This fallacy is appealing for many reasons. The popular notion that new things must be better than old things can be seen continuously through advertising. The implication that anything new is progress makes the public feel connected to accept almost anything new. However, this fallacy provides erroneous reasoning because something that is new does not automatically make it correct or better than something previous. The appeal to novelty is widely observed in different cases, mostly in Science and Technology, but also in political forum discussion such as: stem cell research, labor relations, and anything relating to energy (Knight, A., 2009). In education, the appeal to novelty fallacy can be seen in online programs and materials for the classroom for any content area. Typically, anything that is newer is seen as better, yet, if it lacks the depth of the standards that students need to master, it doesn’t do any good. The appeal to novelty is a close relative to the bandwagon fallacy, if everybody is on board with the newer is better methodology; it is a lot more difficult to sway from the facts of that
reality.
Gambler’s Fallacy According to Clotfelter & Cook (1993), the gambler’s fallacy is the belief that the odds of an experience is lowered when that experience has recently occurred, even though the probability of the experience is objectively known to be independent from the issue. A good example of gambler’s fallacy is the issue of playing specific numbers for the lottery; many players would choose a pattern of numbers solely because of the probability it has been previously played. When it comes to education, gambler’s fallacy can be seen in levels of standardized performance assessment expectations in low socio-economic inner city schools. Once the school outperforms the previous year, the mentality and expectation that they will outperform the second continuous year is limited due to the level of expectation that there may be a possibility for it to happen again. Thus, enabling erroneous reasoning because the facts are not used as the measurement tool to determine the reasoning behind the success, rather, the chances outweigh the facts.
Genetic Fallacy Genetic fallacy is the claim that an idea or person must be untrustworthy because of racial, geographic, or ethnic origin. This fallacy is closely related to ad hominem. The fallacy occurs when an argument is either undervalued or supported only because of its history. Instead of focusing on the argument, the focus is geared towards the argument’s origin or the origin of the person creating the argument. Emotions bring a disconnection to an issue and make it difficult to process objectively. In education, the genetic fallacy can be seen through stereotyping; when the assumptions that all Asians are good at Math or that poor people don’t value education (Strauss, V., 2013). To conclude, logical fallacies are very common in Education. From the many fallacies, the four chosen provide