The Value of Human

Knowledge
Objectives:
• Explain the necessity and imperativeness of being rational in
arriving at truth.
• Discover the significance of philosophizing into finding the Truth.
 Fallacy is an error in
reasoning or in argument.

It is derived from the latin

infinitive fallere, which means
to “ to deceive” or “ to appear
false or deceptive.”
Fallacies are errors or mistakes in
reasoning.
2 kinds of Fallacies:
• Formal Fallacies- errors solely to an
incorrect form or structure of an
argument.
• An error in reasoning due to its
defective logical structure.
Informal Fallacies
• Errors in reasoning due solely to an
anomaly or defect in the content.
• Errors in reasoning by virtue of the
irrelevance or the inappropriateness of
the premises used in justifying a
conclusion.
• It has been grouped into three: Fallacy of
ambiguity, fallacies of Irrelevance, and
fallacies of presumption.
1. Fallacies of Ambiguity
• Referring to fallacies in which the error
in reasoning is brought about by the
occurrence of ambiguous terms whose
meanings are confused in an argument.
2. Fallacies of Presumption
• Fallacies in which the error in
reasoning is brought about by the
occurrence of complex or loaded
expressions whose assumptions are
questionable or have not yet been
proven to be true.
3. Fallacies of Relevance

- Fallacies in which the error in reasoning

is brought about by the irrelevance of the
premise or premises to the conclusion of
an argument.
• The specific types of fallacies falling
under these groups are numerous.
• For the fallacies of ambiguity, it
includes equivocation, composition,
and division.
• For the fallacies of relevance- fallacies
of argument from ignorance, appeal to
authority, appeal to pity, appeal to
force, etc.
• Fallacies of Presumption- Complex
Question, False Cause, Accident, etc.
 Equivocation
This is a fallacy that employs vague terms, or
those used in an equivocal manner, in the
course of the argument or syllogism.
 Syllogism as a proof or
demonstration.

P1: Lapu-lapu is a fish.

P2: Lapu-lapu is the killer
Magellan.

Therefore, The killer of

Magellan is a fish.
 Lalaki: Papakasalan ko na po
anak ninyo sir.

Ama: Kaya mo ba’ng buhayin

ang anak ko?

Lalaki: Bakit po, patay na po ba

siya?
 Amphiboly
This kind of fallacy arises from defect in
grammatical construction.
 Accent
This fallacy arises due to a difference in
interpretation brought about by misplaced
emphasis on a phrase, word, or syllable in a
proposition.
Accent fallacy is the idea that a person’s accent can be used to make
assumptions about their intelligence, education level, and
socioeconomic status.
It is a type of logical fallacy that occurs when the use of language
influences how we interpret an argument.
 Composition
This kind of fallacy arises when an argument
proceeds to take the attributes of the parts of
the whole to be the same attributes of the
whole itself.
Ex. Somebody assumes that something is true for the group
because it is true for one individual.
We know that if a runner in a race runs faster, he or she can win.
Therefore, if every runner in the race runs faster, they can all win.
That is impossible because there is only one winner in a race.
 Division
This fallacy arises when an argument takes
what is true of the whole to be also true of its
parts.
 Jane is American. She lives in Chicago. Her friend, Nico, is
Japanese. Nico lives in Tokyo.
Nico is coming to visit Jane in Chicago next week. Jane knows
that Americans, on average, are fatter than Japanese people.
Therefore, Jane assumes that Nico will be thinner than she is.
However, Jane’s assumption might not be accurate. Nico might
be fatter, thinner, or have the same BMI (body mass index) as
Jane.
 Complex Question
also called Plurium Interrogationem

It arises when the question raised

presupposes an answer to another question
which is not raised.
Circular argument
( Begging the question)
Also called Petitio Principii

This fallacy arises when a proposition is

argued as true because it is true.
 Repeated Assertion
This fallacy arises when one believes that if
one tells a big lie and this lie is told often
enough, people will come to believe that such
lie is the truth.
Repeating something over and over, without any actual proof,
until everyone accepts it as fact
 Accident
This arises when general rules are applied to
particular cases when particular cases have
circumstances which may not
allow the general rules to be applied.
 An error in reasoning caused by sweeping
generalizations. It occurs when we assume that a rule-of-
thumb applies to everyone or every situation, including
obvious exceptions.

While generalizing helps make the world easier to

understand, often generalizations do not apply to every
situation
 A good example of an accident fallacy could be assuming
that ‘birds can fly’ applies to all birds, and therefore arguing,
or even just believing, that a penguin can fly. While the
statement that birds can fly is not false because most birds
can fly penguins are an exception
 Converse Accident
This fallacy arise when particular cases or
circumstances are applied to general rules.
The converse accident fallacy is the assumption that because
something has happened once, it will happen again.
It can be seen in advertising and commercials when a company
claims its product to be “the best” or :the best one you’ll ever
need” based on the event that has already occurred.
 Tu Quoque
This so called- Two wrongs make a right fallacy
arises when one answers a charge of wrong doing
by a similar charge to his opponents.
 Identified in Latin as tu quoque, this tact of argumentation falls
under ad hominem fallacy. Tu quoque, which in essence translates
to "look who's talking," falsely points to the personal
circumstances of a person making an argument to counter the
content of the argument.
Daughter: Why should I listen to you? You started smoking
when you were 16! [Here], the daughter commits the tu
quoque fallacy
 False cause
This arises when one assigns as the cause those
facts that merely come before the effect.
 “ Rodolfo Lozada, jr. killed a black cat.
The following day, he was kidnapped by
armed men. Therefore, it is the killing of
the black cat that caused his getting
kidnapped.”
 Non Sequitur
This is commonly called as the fallacy of
“it does not follow.”
(ignoratio elenchi)

This arises when the conclusion lacks connection

to the proposition.
 “Angel is a philosophy student.
Therefore, I am convinced that she will
become an astronaut.”
Argumentum ad Hominem
This arises when the real claims of an argument
are ignored and the character, personality, or
belief of the opponent is emphasized.
 “Your honor, it would be very difficult for us
not to believe that the accused of this murder
case is not guilty, because the father and
grandfather of the accused had been
convicted of murder several years ago. And
besides, the accused is of bad moral
reputation.”
 Argumentum ad Ignorantiam
also known as the fallacy of appeal to ignorance

It arises when an argument is taken as true just

because it has not been proven as false, or when an
argument is taken as false because it has not been
proven as true.
The argument offers lack of evidence as if it were evidence
to the contrary. The argument says, "No one knows it is
true; therefore it is false," or "No one knows it is false,
therefore it is true.“
There is no proof that capital punishment prevents violent crime.
We can only conclude that it doesn't. Our state is better off
without the death penalty."
 Argumentum ad Verecundiam
This arises when one who has difficulty in confronting or
understanding complicated questions seeks refuge t the
ideas , concepts, principles, or judgments of a person
who enjoys a reputation of an expert or an authority on
matter at hand.
 Richard Dawkins, an evolutionary biologist and perhaps the
foremost expert in the field, says that evolution is true. Therefore,
it's true.

Explanation: Richard Dawkins certainly knows about evolution,

and he can confidently tell us that it is true, but that doesn't make
it true. What makes it true is the preponderance of evidence for
the theory.
 Argumentum ad Populum
Also called the fallacy of appeal to the people.
It arises when one, instead of concentrating on or giving
more emphasis to the relevant facts of the argument,
gives more emphasis to the emotions and opinions of the
crowd or of the multitude as basis of his conclusion.
Everyone drives over the speed limit, so it should not be against
the law.

Just because a lot of people do something, it does not make it the

right thing to do.
Argumentum ad misericordiam
This is a fallacy of appeal to pity.

It arises when an appeal to evidence is replaced

by an appeal to pity, mercy or sympathy.
"You should not find the defendant guilty of murder, since it
would break his poor mother's heart to see him sent to jail."
 Argumentum ad Baculum
This is a fallacy of appeal to might.

It arises when one appeals to intimidation or the

use of force in order to gain acceptance of his/her
claims.