Logical Fallacies And False Cause

Logical fallacies are imperfections in cognitive thinking that can lead to illogical thoughts and statements. Debates are the best-known producer of logical fallacies, since they tend to transpire when opinions are being discussed. Furthermost, logical fallacies impersonate reasonable statements, but are mere attempts to influence the listener by engaging their emotions instead of their minds.

Fallacies have long been used to corrupt and control the perception of the masses, in such perfect manner as to shield the true agenda of the disguised corporations we have grown to know as countries. Here we will review several of the methods used to deflect natural intuition to swim in the sea of mental manipulations. Of the eight great fallacies false cause is the most prominent. According to Randy Hollenback, false cause or “post hoc” (Latin for “after this, therefore because of this”) or the Butterfly effect.” Connecting someone claims that a new weather satellite launched last week has caused the rain that’s been falling ever since, that person is connecting tow events that have no causal relationship to each other. The butterfly effect is used to express the theory that a small change in preliminary circumstances can result in a greater shift later.
When presenting an argument in light of false cause, be mindful of whether or not the two points are connected.
The concept of cause and effect illustrates false cause’s rippling effect. When several events are related and can be linked to each other, a major case of jumping to conclusions can manifest for those that do not carefully examine the outcome with logic and reason. Such as stating “Every time I go to sleep, the sun goes down” would be a false cause statement drawing the conclusion that by me going to sleep, it causes the sun to go down. My sleeping is the cause, which leads to the effect of the sun
setting.

Improving the use of logic takes time and skills. Accepting statements as true when you do not know it to be such. A disciplined mind will overcast hasty judgments and narrow-mindedness. Split the individual issues under examination into as many parts as possible. Most problems are a combination of smaller issues compacted causing misunderstanding that can lead to a draw conclusion. Starting with the simplest elements will spark the listeners’ attention then ease into more complex topics.

Because the answer is found in the details, studying each part separately and then together as a whole will ensure a logical conclusion is draw over an illogical one. Using words to convey false conclusions should be avoided because of their over simplifying and general nature. Words such as never, all and always fall into that category.

Controversy amongst the use of true lies dwells on the correlation between logic and rhetoric. Rhetoric has the goal of persuading the audience. The audience cannot be persuaded unless the argument is grounded on a foundation of true elements. As stated above, an argument sound on all grounds must be true. If your premise is different so shall the conclusion. Analyzing all angles of the argument will insure that common grounds are covered.
A great way to sharpen one’s thinking, initiates effective debates, avoid bias, can be exercised through the examination of several points of view on the same topic. Searching for validity in all angles will ensure a vast pool of creative thought and production of logical thought.