Fallacies.docx

1、FallaciesFallaciesWhat this handout is aboutThis handout is on common logical fallacies that you may encounter in your own writing or the writing of others. The handout provides definitions, examples, and tips on avoiding these fallacies.ArgumentsMost academic writing tasks require you to make an ar

2、gumentthat is, to present reasons for a particular claim or interpretation you are putting forward. You may have been told that you need to make your arguments more logical or stronger. And you may have worried that you simply arent a logical person or wondered what it means for an argument to be st

3、rong. Learning to make the best arguments you can is an ongoing process, but it isnt impossible: Being logical is something anyone can do, with practice! Each argument you make is composed of premises (this is a term for statements that express your reasons or evidence) that are arranged in the righ

4、t way to support your conclusion (the main claim or interpretation you are offering). You can make your arguments stronger by 1. using good premises (ones you have good reason to believe are both true and relevant to the issue at hand),2. making sure your premises provide good support for your concl

5、usion (and not some other conclusion, or no conclusion at all), 3. checking that you have addressed the most important or relevant aspects of the issue (that is, that your premises and conclusion focus on what is really important to the issue youre arguing about), and 4. not making claims that are s

6、o strong or sweeping that you cant really support them. You also need to be sure that you present all of your ideas in an orderly fashion that readers can follow. See our handouts on argument and organization for some tips that will improve your arguments. This handout describes some ways in which a

7、rguments often fail to do the things listed above; these failings are called fallacies. If youre having trouble developing your argument, check to see if a fallacy is part of the problem! It is particularly easy to slip up and commit a fallacy when you have strong feelings about your topicif a concl

8、usion seems obvious to you, youre more likely to just assume that it is true and to be careless with your evidence. To help you see how people commonly make this mistake, this handout uses a number of controversial political examplesarguments about subjects like abortion, gun control, the death pena

9、lty, gay marriage, euthanasia, and pornography. The purpose of this handout, though, is not to argue for any particular position on any of these issues; rather, it is to illustrate weak reasoning, which can happen in pretty much any kind of argument! Please be aware that the claims in these examples

10、 are just made-up illustrationsthey havent been researched, so you shouldnt use them as evidence in your own writing.topWhat are fallacies?Fallacies are defects that weaken arguments. By learning to look for them in your own and others writing, you can strengthen your ability to evaluate the argumen

11、ts you make, read, and hear. It is important to realize two things about fallacies: First, fallacious arguments are very, very common and can be quite persuasive, at least to the casual reader or listener. You can find dozens of examples of fallacious reasoning in newspapers, advertisements, and oth

12、er sources. Second, it is sometimes hard to evaluate whether an argument is fallacious. An argument might be very weak, somewhat weak, somewhat strong, or very strong. An argument that has several stages or parts might have some strong sections and some weak ones. The goal of this handout, then, is

13、not to teach you how to label arguments as fallacious or fallacy-free, but to help you look critically at your own arguments and move them away from the weak and toward the strong end of the continuum.topSo what do fallacies look like?For each fallacy listed, there is a definition or explanation, an

14、 example, and a tip on how to avoid committing the fallacy in your own arguments.topHasty generalization Definition: Making assumptions about a whole group or range of cases based on a sample that is inadequate (usually because it is atypical or just too small). Stereotypes about people (librarians

15、are shy and smart, wealthy people are snobs, etc.) are a common example of the principle underlying hasty generalization. Example: My roommate said her philosophy class was hard, and the one Im in is hard, too. All philosophy classes must be hard! Two peoples experiences are, in this case, not enoug

16、h on which to base a conclusion. Tip: Ask yourself what kind of sample youre using: Are you relying on the opinions or experiences of just a few people, or your own experience in just a few situations? If so, consider whether you need more evidence, or perhaps a less sweeping conclusion. (Notice tha

17、t in the example, the more modest conclusion Some philosophy classes are hard for some students would not be a hasty generalization.) topMissing the pointDefinition: The premises of an argument do support a particular conclusionbut not the conclusion that the arguer actually draws.Example: The serio

18、usness of a punishment should match the seriousness of the crime. Right now, the punishment for drunk driving may simply be a fine. But drunk driving is a very serious crime that can kill innocent people. So the death penalty should be the punishment for drunk driving. The argument actually supports

19、 several conclusionsThe punishment for drunk driving should be very serious, in particularbut it doesnt support the claim that the death penalty, specifically, is warranted. Tip: Separate your premises from your conclusion. Looking at the premises, ask yourself what conclusion an objective person wo

20、uld reach after reading them. Looking at your conclusion, ask yourself what kind of evidence would be required to support such a conclusion, and then see if youve actually given that evidence. Missing the point often occurs when a sweeping or extreme conclusion is being drawn, so be especially caref

21、ul if you know youre claiming something big.topPost hoc (also called false cause) This fallacy gets its name from the Latin phrase post hoc, ergo propter hoc, which translates as after this, therefore because of this. Definition: Assuming that because B comes after A, A caused B. Of course, sometime

22、s one event really does cause another one that comes laterfor example, if I register for a class, and my name later appears on the roll, its true that the first event caused the one that came later. But sometimes two events that seem related in time arent really related as cause and event. That is,

23、correlation isnt the same thing as causation.Examples: President Jones raised taxes, and then the rate of violent crime went up. Jones is responsible for the rise in crime. The increase in taxes might or might not be one factor in the rising crime rates, but the argument hasnt shown us that one caus

24、ed the other. Tip: To avoid the post hoc fallacy, the arguer would need to give us some explanation of the process by which the tax increase is supposed to have produced higher crime rates. And thats what you should do to avoid committing this fallacy: If you say that A causes B, you should have som

25、ething more to say about how A caused B than just that A came first and B came later! topSlippery slopeDefinition: The arguer claims that a sort of chain reaction, usually ending in some dire consequence, will take place, but theres really not enough evidence for that assumption. The arguer asserts

26、that if we take even one step onto the slippery slope, we will end up sliding all the way to the bottom; he or she assumes we cant stop halfway down the hill. Example: Animal experimentation reduces our respect for life. If we dont respect life, we are likely to be more and more tolerant of violent

27、acts like war and murder. Soon our society will become a battlefield in which everyone constantly fears for their lives. It will be the end of civilization. To prevent this terrible consequence, we should make animal experimentation illegal right now. Since animal experimentation has been legal for

28、some time and civilization has not yet ended, it seems particularly clear that this chain of events wont necessarily take place. Even if we believe that experimenting on animals reduces respect for life, and loss of respect for life makes us more tolerant of violence, that may be the spot on the hil

29、lside at which things stopwe may not slide all the way down to the end of civilization. And so we have not yet been given sufficient reason to accept the arguers conclusion that we must make animal experimentation illegal right now. Like post hoc, slippery slope can be a tricky fallacy to identify,

30、since sometimes a chain of events really can be predicted to follow from a certain action. Heres an example that doesnt seem fallacious: If I fail English 101, I wont be able to graduate. If I dont graduate, I probably wont be able to get a good job, and I may very well end up doing temp work or fli

31、pping burgers for the next year. Tip: Check your argument for chains of consequences, where you say if A, then B, and if B, then C, and so forth. Make sure these chains are reasonable.topWeak analogy Definition: Many arguments rely on an analogy between two or more objects, ideas, or situations. If

32、the two things that are being compared arent really alike in the relevant respects, the analogy is a weak one, and the argument that relies on it commits the fallacy of weak analogy. Example: Guns are like hammerstheyre both tools with metal parts that could be used to kill someone. And yet it would be ridiculous to restrict the purchase of hammersso restrictions on purchasing guns are equally ridiculous. While guns and hammers do share certain features, these features (having metal parts, being tools, and being potentially use