InstructionsAnswer the following items in no less than 2 sentences each.

Write your answers in

your notebook.

 What is a fallacy? Discuss.

 Fallacies are defects that weaken arguments
 Fallacies can be either illegitimate arguments or irrelevant points, and are often
identified because they lack evidence that supports their claim.
 What is sound reasoning? Discuss.
 Sound reasoning stems from a valid argument whose conclusion follows from its premise.
 This structure of two premises and one conclusion forms the basic argumentative
structure.

Define and explain the following types of reasoning. Also, provide 2 examples for each.

 Deductive
 Deductive reasoning is the process of making a logical argument by applying known facts,
definitions, properties.
 the laws of logic If-then statements are typically used in deductive reasoning If something
is true then something else must be true
 Inductive
 Inductive reasoning, also known as inductive logic, is a style of reasoning in which a
general conclusion is drawn from a set of specific observations.
 Inductive reasoning is sometimes referred to as "bottom-up" logic because it entails
expanding specific premises into bigger generalizations.

Define and explain the following types of fallacies in reasoning. Also, provide 2 example
statements for each.

 A. Bandwagon
 a logical fallacy that is based on the assumption that something must be true or good if it’s
in accordance with the opinions of many others.
 It’s an extremely common error and can be committed either unintentionally or on
purpose.
 B. Hasty Generalization
 a type of logical fallacy that is used to generalize an experience by using examples rather
than evidence.
 This type of fallacy might also be referred to as a hasty induction or an over-extension.
 C. Red Herring
 a type of logical fallacy or a literary device that is frequently used in suspense and
mystery literature.
 it’s a fallacy that is committed when someone deliberately tries to derail a discussion from
the issue at hand to a new, unrelated topic
 D. False Dilemma
 a flaw in reasoning that weakens an argument, in which someone offers a limited number
of options when more options exist.
 It’s a common type of error in various types of debates and discussions — from politics
and media to our everyday conversations.
 E, Ad Hominem
 Ad hominem abusive often referred to as “personal attack”, is likely the most common
type of ad hominem argument, as well as one of the most common logical fallacies.
 It fallaciously focuses on the person behind the argument, rather than on the argument
itself.
 F. Straw Man
 The straw man fallacy is a type of fallacy which is used as a way of attacking the
argument of the opposition.
 This is a tactic which is often used in areas that involve heavy debate such as in politics
or other types of controversial debates.
 G Slippery Slope.
 It happens when someone asserts that a certain proposition or action must be rejected
because it would have unintended consequences, typically leading to a disastrous
outcome.
 Essentially, they assume that a chain of events will occur without providing enough proof
to support their view.
 H. Tu Quoque
 Tu quoque (Latin for “you too”) is a common type of logical fallacy, meaning a flaw in
reasoning that weakens an argument or a trick of thought used as a debate tactic.
 It occurs when someone’s argument is discredited solely based on the allegation that their
past actions or words are not consistent with their views.
 I. Causal Fallacy
 Post hoc ergo propter hoc (“after this, therefore because of this”), or post hoc fallacy, is a
logical fallacy that occurs when someone assumes that one event must have caused a
later event simply because it happened after the other.
 This type of thinking is the basis for various kinds of beliefs, superstitions, and false
findings in the search for causes of certain diseases.
 J. Sunk Cost Fallacy
 Humans are especially susceptible to the “sunk cost fallacy”—a psychological effect
where we feel compelled to continue doing something just because we’ve already put
time and effort into it.
 But the reality is that no matter what you spend your time doing, you can never get that
time back.
 K. Appeal to Authority
 This does not refer to appropriately citing an expert, but rather when an arguer tries to get
people to agree with him/her by appealing to a supposed authority who isn’t much of an
expert.
 Example: “Gun laws should be extremely strict and it should be incredibly difficult to
acquire a gun.
 L. Appeal to Pity
 Attempting to convince an individual to accept a conclusion by making them feel sorry for
someone .
 Example: “I know the paper was due today, but my computer died last week, and then the
computer lab was too noisy, so while I was on my way to the library, a cop pulled me over
and wrote me a ticket, and I was so upset by the ticket that I sat by the side of the road
crying for 3 hours! You should give me an A for all the trouble I’ve been through!” ((These
fallacies are quite common around the due date of the final paper!))

Why is it important to be able to recognize and identify logical fallacies?

Why? First, so that when we’re making an argument we avoid such mistakes. Second, so that we
are better prepared to sniff out fallacies in other people’s arguments.