Logical Fallacies

Fallacious Argument
• Fallacies are defects that weakens arguments.

• An argument is fallacious when it contains one

or more logical fallacies.

• A logical fallacy – is an argument that contains a

mistake in reasoning.

• Fallacious arguments are very, very common

and can be quite persuasive, at least to the
causal reader or listener. You can find dozens of
examples of fallacious reasoning in newspapers,
advertisements, and other sources.
 Two broad groups of fallacies
• Fallacies of Relevance: are mistakes in
reasoning that occur because the premises are
logically irrelevant to the conclusion.

• Fallacies of insufficient evidence: are

mistakes in reasoning that occur because the
premises, though logically relevant to the
conclusion, fail to provide sufficient evidence to
support the conclusion.
Fallacies of Relevance
 Fallacies of Relevance
• A Fallacy of Relevance occurs when an
arguer offers reasons that are logically
irrelevant to his or her conclusion.
 Fallacies of Relevance
• Look who is Talking
• Two Wrongs Make a Right
• Scare Tactics
• Appeal to Pity
• Begging the Question
 Fallacies of Insufficient Evidence

• Appeal to Ignorance
• Loaded Question
• Weak Analogy
• Post Hoc Fallacy
• Mere Co-relation Fallacy
Fallacies of Relevance

1. Look who is Talking (Tu Quoque)

• Fallacy of Look who is Talking is committed
when an arguer rejects another person’s
argument or claim because that person fails to
practice what he preaches.
 Look who is talking
• Doctors are
supposed to
convince others
to quit smoking.
Example
Doctor: you should quit smoking.
Patient: Look who is talking! I’ll quit when you do, Dr.
Smokestack.!

• In the example the pattern of reasoning is clearly

fallacious.

• Because the premises provide no relevant reasons to

accept the conclusion.
Fallacies of Relevance

2. Two Wrongs Make a Right

• Fallacy of Two wrongs Make a Right occurs

when an arguer attempts to justify a wrongful act
by claiming that some other act is just as bad or
worse.
• Zinedine Zidane head-butted Markus Materazzi during
the FIFA world cup.

• He justified his actions saying that Materazzi bad-

mouthed his sister.

• Therefore Zidane commited two wrongs make a right

fallacy.
• http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vF4iWIE77Ts
Example

I don’t feel guilty about cheating on Dr. Patel’s

test. Half the class chests on his tests.

Amit: Joy, quit hitting your sister.

Joy: Well, she pinched me.

• In the examples the pattern of reasoning is clearly

fallacious.

• Because the premises provide no relevant reasons to

accept the conclusion.
Fallacies of Relevance

3. Scare Tactics
• The fallacy of scare tactics is committed when
an arguer threatens harm to a reader or listener
if he or she does not accept the arguer’s
conclusion and this threat is irrelevant to the
truth of the arguer’s conclusion.
 Scare Tactics
• Advertisement to
convey ill effects
of tobacco.

• It is used to convince
people to stay away
from tobacco
consumption.
Example

Pakistan to India: We are sure you’ll agree that

we are the rightful rulers of Kashmir. It would be
regrettable if we had to send armed forces to
demonstrate the validity of our claim.

• In the example the pattern of reasoning is clearly

fallacious.

• Because the premises provide no relevant reasons to

accept the conclusion.
Fallacies of Relevance

4. Appeal to Pity

• The fallacy of appeal to pity occurs when an

arguer inappropriately attempts to evoke
feelings of pity or compassion from his listeners
or readers.
 Appeal to Pity
• Advertisements used
to convince bald men
to go for hair
transplantation.
Example

Parent to high school football coach: I admit my son Billy

can’t run, pass, kick, catch, block, or tackle, but he
deserves to make the football team. If he doesn’t make
the team, he’s going to be an emotional wreak, and he
may even drop out of school.

• In the example the pattern of reasoning is clearly

fallacious.

• Because the premises provide no relevant reasons to

accept the conclusion.
Fallacies of Relevance

5. Begging the Question

• The fallacy of begging the question is committed

when an arguer states or assumes as a premise
the very thing he or she is trying to prove as a
conclusion.
 Begging the question
• Advertisement of
Navratna Tel trying to
convince that the oil
is as cold as ice..
• There are two ways to commit this fallacy:

• 1st : To simply, Restate the conclusion in slightly

different words.

• 2nd : “Circular Reasoning” or “Arguing in a Circle”

• Restate the conclusion in slightly different words.

Example
Bungee – jumping is dangerous because it is
unsafe.

Here, the premise basically repeats the

conclusion: saying that bungee – jumping is
“unsafe” is another way of saying that it is
“dangerous”
• “Circular Reasoning” or “Arguing in a Circle”

This occurs when a arguer offers a chain of

reasons for a conclusion.

Example
Sam: God wrote the Bible.
Jim: How do you know?
Sam: Because it says so in the Bible, and what
the Bible says is true.
Jim: How do you know what the Bible says is
true?
Sam: Because God wrote the Bible.
Fallacies of Insufficient
Evidence
 Fallacies of Insufficient Evidence

• Appeal to Ignorance
• Loaded Question
• Weak Analogy
• Post Hoc Fallacy
• Mere Co-relation Fallacy
Fallacies of Insufficient Evidence

1. Appeal to Ignorance

• The fallacy of Appeal to Ignorance occurs when

an arguer asserts that a claim must be true
because no one has proven it false or,
conversely, that a claim must be false because
no one has proven it true.
 Appeal to ignorance
• Pure-it advertisement
convincing that no one
yet has proven their
claim wrong.
Example

There must be intelligent life on other planets. No one

has proven that there isn’t.

There isn’t any intelligent life on other planets. No one

has proven that there is.

Each of the above examples assumes that the lack of

evidence for (or against) a claim is good reason to
believe that the claim is false (or true)

Hence there is a fallacy of appeal to ignorance.

2. Loaded Question

• The loaded question fallacy occurs when an

arguer asks a question that contains an unfair or
unwarranted presuppositions.
 Loaded question
• Situations were it is very difficult to say
“yes” or “no”
Example

Joe: Have you stopped cheating on exams?

Pete: No!
Joe: Oh, so you admit that you still cheat on
exam?
Pete: No, I meant to say yes!
Joe: Oh, so you admit that you used to cheat on
exams?
Pete: No!
• It’s a tricky example.

• Joe’s question, “Have you stopped cheating on

exams?” is a loaded question because any
direct answer to it will force Pete to admit
something that he does not want to admit.
3. Weak Analogy

• Weak Analogy occurs when an

arguer compares two (or more) things
that aren’t really comparable in
relevant respects.
 Weak analogy
• Advertisement trying to compare the
product benefit with brightness of light.
Weak analogy
 Weak Analogy
Example
Cabbage is leafy and green and tastes
great with a veggie burger. Poison ivy
is also leafy and green. Therefore,
poison ivy probably tastes great with a
veggie burger too.
4. Post Hoc Fallacy

• When an arguer assumes, without

adequate evidence, that because one
event, A, occurred before another event,
B, A is the cause of B.
 Post Hoc Fallacy
• Advertisement trying
to convince that
Salman khan could
jump from the
heights because he
had Mountain Dew
first.
 Post Hoc Fallacy
Example
Villager: Two days after that bad old lady
moved into the village, my cow died. That
witch must have done something to my
cow.
5. Mere Correlation Fallacy

• When an arguer assumes, without sufficient

evidence, that because A and B regularly occur
together, A must be the cause of B.
Mere Correlation Fallacy
• Horlicks advertisement emphasizing that
increase in height, brain, and strength is
caused by regular intake of Horlicks.
“Taller, Stronger and Sharper”
Example

On Monday I stayed up all night partying, had eggs

for breakfast, and failed my calculus test.
On Wednesday I stayed up all night partying, had
eggs for breakfast, and failed my biology test.
On Thursday I stayed up all night partying, had
eggs for breakfast, and failed my history test.
Obviously, to do better on tests, I must stop eating
eggs for breakfast.
• In the example the arguer has mistakenly
assumed that because two events are regularly
correlated (i.e. occur together), there must be a
cause-and-effect relationship between them.