PCR0025Topic 6 Logical Fallacies
PCR0025
Critical Thinking
All Foundation
ONLINE NOTES
LOGICAL FALLACIES
Logical fallacy: An argument that contains a mistake in reasoning.
2 major groups:
1. Fallacies of relevance
2. Fallacies of insufficient evidence
Fallacies of Relevance
Mistakes in reasoning that occur because the premises are logically irrelevant to the conclusions.
1. Personal Attack
2. Attacking the motive
3. Look Who’s Talking (Tu Quoque)
4. Two Wrongs Make a Right
5. Scare Tactics
6. Appeal to Pity
7. Bandwagon Argument
8. Straw Man
9. Red Herring
10. Equivocation
11. Begging the Question
Personal Attack
When we reject someone’s argument/claim by attacking the person rather than the person’s argument/claim.
Attacking the Motive
Error of criticizing a person’s motivation for offering argument/claim, rather than examining the merit/worth of the argument/claim itself.
Look Who’s Talking (Tu Quoque)
When we reject someone’s argument because the person fail to practice what he preaches.
Two Wrongs Make A Right
When an arguer attempts to justify a wrongful act by claiming that some other act is just as bad or worse.
Scare Tactics
When an arguer threatens harm to someone if he/she doesn’t accept the arguer’s conclusion, and this threat is irrelevant to the truth of arguer’s conclusion.
Appeal to Pity
When an arguer inappropriately attempts to evoke feelings of pity @ compassion from his listeners/readers.
Bandwagon Argument
The arguer tries to play on a person’s desire to be popular, accepted, @ valued rather than appealing to logically relevant reasons/evidence.
Straw Man
When an arguer distorts an opponent’s argument/calim to make it easier to attack.
Red Herring
When an arguer tries to sidetrack his audience by raising an irrelevant issue to settle the original issue.
Equivocation
When a key word is used in 2 @ more senses in the same argument and the apparent success of the argument depends on the shift in meaning.
Begging the Question
When
Critical Thinking
All Foundation
ONLINE NOTES
LOGICAL FALLACIES
Logical fallacy: An argument that contains a mistake in reasoning.
2 major groups:
1. Fallacies of relevance
2. Fallacies of insufficient evidence
Fallacies of Relevance
Mistakes in reasoning that occur because the premises are logically irrelevant to the conclusions.
1. Personal Attack
2. Attacking the motive
3. Look Who’s Talking (Tu Quoque)
4. Two Wrongs Make a Right
5. Scare Tactics
6. Appeal to Pity
7. Bandwagon Argument
8. Straw Man
9. Red Herring
10. Equivocation
11. Begging the Question
Personal Attack
When we reject someone’s argument/claim by attacking the person rather than the person’s argument/claim.
Attacking the Motive
Error of criticizing a person’s motivation for offering argument/claim, rather than examining the merit/worth of the argument/claim itself.
Look Who’s Talking (Tu Quoque)
When we reject someone’s argument because the person fail to practice what he preaches.
Two Wrongs Make A Right
When an arguer attempts to justify a wrongful act by claiming that some other act is just as bad or worse.
Scare Tactics
When an arguer threatens harm to someone if he/she doesn’t accept the arguer’s conclusion, and this threat is irrelevant to the truth of arguer’s conclusion.
Appeal to Pity
When an arguer inappropriately attempts to evoke feelings of pity @ compassion from his listeners/readers.
Bandwagon Argument
The arguer tries to play on a person’s desire to be popular, accepted, @ valued rather than appealing to logically relevant reasons/evidence.
Straw Man
When an arguer distorts an opponent’s argument/calim to make it easier to attack.
Red Herring
When an arguer tries to sidetrack his audience by raising an irrelevant issue to settle the original issue.
Equivocation
When a key word is used in 2 @ more senses in the same argument and the apparent success of the argument depends on the shift in meaning.
Begging the Question
When