Refuting Logical Fallacies

When you critique a text, you need to address (discuss) and refute (explain why they are illogical) some of the
logical fallacies you find in the text. However, we don’t usually say the name of the fallacy directly. Instead, we
need to explain in more detail why the argument is illogical.

“This is an example of a single cause argument.” NOT

OKAY

“The author’s argument is illogical, as it assumes that (a) caused (b) while ignoring other
possible causes, such as…..” GOOD

Below are some sentence patterns that you can use to discuss the different types of logical fallacies:

Misrepresenting Cause & Effect

The author's argument about/claim that (...) is illogical, as it / because it...
The author employs a fallacious argument when he/she/they say (...) as he/she/they/ because he/she/they...
Slippery Slope
...assumes that (a) will result in / will lead to (b), (c), and (d) without establishing evidence for this premise.
Single Cause
...reduces a complex issue to a single, solitary cause while ignoring other potential factors, such as (...).
…assumes that (a) caused (b) / is the main cause of (b) while ignoring other possible causes, such as(...)”

Example: The production of meat causes pollution and Co2 emissions, so it is the main cause of global
warming.

The author employs a fallacious argument when they say that meat production is the main cause of
pollution and Co2 emissions while ignoring other possible causes, such as industrial manufacturing or the use
of cars.

Generalizations.
Hasty Generalization
The author makes a hasty generalization when he/she/they say that (...)
The author generalizes a personal experience when he/she says that (...)
Stereotyping
The author’s argument that (…) is a stereotype about (...)
The author's argument that (...) demonstrates stereotypical thinking.
 Example: Most environmentalists are women, because men don’t care much about the environment.

The author’s argument that “most environmentalists are women, because men don’t care much about the
environment” demonstrates stereotypical thinking.

Misrepresenting Others' Ideas

Personal Attack
The author uses/employs personal attacks towards (a) by saying (…) rather than giving logical proof to
support/explain….

Example: Justin Trudeau was a drama teacher, so he’s not qualified to be the leader of Canada’s
government and tell us what environmental policy works best.

The author employs personal attacks towards Trudeau by suggesting that he is not qualified to be Prime
Minister because of his background as a drama teacher rather than giving logical proof to explain why
Trudeau’s environmental policies are problematic.

How would you refute the following illogical statements?

1. If we do not recycle our water bottles, the streets will be full of empty bottles and people might trip on
them and die.

2. I talked to someone who works in the oil industry, and he said his company helps protect the wildlife in
their area. Oil companies are the protectors of the environment.
Look at the following claims from the article “Oil sands are a triumph for the human ‘environment’”. Each
statement shows a logical fallacy. Write a response to each statement. Use information from the article “Future
of the oilsands: the good, the bad and the ugly” to help you explain as needed.

1. However, from my visit, I could see that the companies involved in the oilsands cared about the
environment. (para. 2)

2. Our schools, hospitals, universities, arts and industries are at the very top— and this is all because we have
the energy to drive an economy that can support these great gains. (para. 3)

3. People need energy, and people need jobs. Without oil, there will be massive unemployment, leading our
economy to collapse. (para. 6)
 Applying Critical Analysis – Use of Evidence

Misleading Statements
 The author's statement that (…) is misleading because...

 The author uses misleading statements in support of his/her/their argument that (...). For
example, he/she/they say that...

 The author makes a misleading statement when he/she/they say(s) that...

Omission of Facts
 The author omits background information that would help the reader understand the issue
of (...) more deeply.

 The author omits important information/facts about (…) in his/her/their article.

Lack of Proof
 The author lacks proof in his/her/their assertion that …, as/because...

 The author asserts that …, but his/her/their statement lacks proof, as it….

o doesn't show concrete evidence that ….

o doesn’t cite any statistics or give expert opinion

o prove this has happened in the past.

Look at the following claims from the article “Oil sands are a triumph for the human ‘environment’”. Write a
response to each statement. Use information from the article “Future of the oilsands: the good, the bad and
the ugly” to help you explain.

1. The oilsands are absolutely not harmful to the environment; in fact, they are beneficial to the environment.
(para. 2)

2. Environmentalists care more for trees than for the economy; they have no answer for how people would live
without oil. (para. 5)

3. A recent poll by the Cedar Research group shows that the majority of Canadians welcome the economic
gains brought by oilsands growth. (para. 6)

4. People need energy, and people need jobs. Without oil, there will be massive unemployment, leading our
economy to collapse. (para. 6)

Example:
Trump’s statement that the ice caps are no longer in danger of melting is misleading because while it is true
that ice caps are “setting records”, they are at record lows. Research from NASA in March 2018 notes that ice
cap levels at a record low in the Arctic (around the North Pole) right now and near record low in the Antarctic
(around the South Pole).

Response Paragraph #1 Agreeing Disagreeing

Controlling Idea: Lack of proof

Explain why:  He claims that a private-public security operation would result in greater
security throughout the area, but he doesn't cite any expert opinion or
statistics.
 o eg."This plan would also have a crippling effect on weapon and
drug smuggling throughout the region."

The author lacks proof in his assertion that a private-public security operation
would result in greater security throughout the area as he doesn't cite any expert
opinion or statistics. For example, the author says "This plan would also have a
crippling effect on weapon and drug smuggling throughout the region." Without
concrete evidence, a significant claim like this cannot be taken seriously, which
weakens his position.

Writing a Negative Response

 Identify the problem (type and context)

 Give examples/evidence from the text.
 Explain why this damages their argument.

Response Paragraph #1 Agreeing Disagreeing

Controlling Idea: Supports argument with statistics – oil companies more successful because
of government funding.

Explain why:  Uses statistics to show contrast:

 “While the oilsands are still economically important, they are partly
successfully only because of government support. Canada supplied $3
 billion annually in financial backing - including government subsidies - for
struggling oil, gas and coal companies between 2013 and 2015,
compared to $171 million for clean energy, according to government
data released in July.”

The author’s use of statistics to support their position that government funding is
one of the reasons why the oilsands are able to operate successfully and pay
workers at a higher rate shows clear evidence that renewable energy companies are
not supported at an equal rate, which in turn helps to explain the lower pay for
workers transferring to work in the renewable energy sector.

Writing a Positive Response

 Identify the good point (give detail)

 Give examples/evidence from the text.
 Explain why this supports/strengthens their argument – connect to the ‘big
picture’.

Response Paragraph #1 Agreeing Disagreeing

Controlling Idea: Lack of proof

Explain why:  He claims that a private-public security operation would result in greater
security throughout the area, but he doesn't cite any expert opinion or
statistics.
 o eg."This plan would also have a crippling effect on weapon and
drug smuggling throughout the region."

The author lacks proof in his assertion that a private-public security operation would result in greater security throughout
the area as he doesn't cite any expert opinion or statistics. For example, the author says "This plan would also have a
crippling effect on weapon and drug smuggling throughout the region." Without concrete evidence, a significant claim
like this cannot be taken seriously, which weakens his position.

Writing a Negative Response

 Identify the problem (type and context)

 Give examples/evidence from the text.
 Explain why this damages their argument.

Response Paragraph #1 Agreeing Disagreeing

Controlling Idea: Supports argument with statistics – oil companies more successful because
of government funding.

Explain why:  Uses statistics to show contrast:

 “While the oilsands are still economically important, they are partly
successfully only because of government support. Canada supplied $3
billion annually in financial backing - including government subsidies - for
struggling oil, gas and coal companies between 2013 and 2015,
compared to $171 million for clean energy, according to government
data released in July.”

The author’s use of statistics to support their position that government funding is one of the reasons why the oilsands are
able to operate successfully and pay workers at a higher rate shows clear evidence that renewable energy companies are
not supported at an equal rate, which in turn helps to explain the lower pay for workers transferring to work in the
renewable energy sector.

Writing a Positive Response

 Identify the good point (give detail)

 Give examples/evidence from the text.
 Explain why this supports/strengthens their argument – connect to the ‘big picture’.