FALLACIES

Fallacies – errors in
reasoning that
invalidate the
argument
1. Dicto Simpliciter – means an
argument based on an unqualified
generalization.
Ex. Exercise is good . Therefore,
everybody should exercise.
Corrrect: Exercise is usually good.
Exercise is good for most
people.
2. Hasty Generalization – there are
too few instances to support the
conclusion.
Ex. John can’t speak Ibaloy. Joey can
not speak Ibaloy. Therefore ,nobody
in Aringay High School can speak
Ibaloy.
3. Post Hoc - assuming that
because one thing follows another,
it was caused by the other.
Ex. “Let’s not take Billy on our
picnic. Every time we take it out
with us, it rains.”
4. Contradictory Premises – when
the premises of an argument
contradict each other, there can be
no argument.
Ex. If Gary can do anything, can he
make a chair which he can’t repair?
5. Ad Misecordiam – appeal for
sympathy.
Ex. Ladies and gentlemen of the jury,
look at this miserable man in a wheel
chair unable to use his legs, could such
a man really be guilty of
embezzlement?
6. Hypothesis contrary to fact – starting
with a hypothesis which is not true or a
poorly supported claim and then draw any
supportable conclusions from it.
Ex. If Hitler had not invaded Russia and
opened up two military fronts, the Nazis
would surely have won the war.
7. Poisoning the Well – judging his
opponent before he could even start .
Ex. Two men are having a debate. The
first one says, “ My opponent is a
notorious liar. You can’t believe a word
that he is going to say.’
8. False Analogy – wrong analogy.
Ex. The students should be allowed
to look at their textbooks during
examination . After all, surgeons have
x-rays to guide them during a trial,
carpenters have blue prints to guide
them.
9. Begging the question – the opinion to be
proved is given as if it were already proved.
Example:Global warming doesn’t exist because
the earth is not getting warmer.
10. False cause(Cause and Effect) – citing a false
or remote cause to explain a situation.
Example: The increase in global warming in the
past decade is because more teenagers are using
hairspray.
11. Either or Fallacy – discussing an issue as if there
are only two alternatives. This fallacy ignores any
other possible alternatives.
Example: We either ban hairspray or the world will
end.
12. Evasion – ignoring or evading the question.
Example: Reporter: “Senator, what is your view on
global warming?
Senator:” Global warming is definitely something we
need to look into.”
13. Oversimplification – making a complicated issue
seem very simple by using simple terms or
suppressing information.
Example: Global warming is caused by using
hairspray and other beauty products.
14. Rationalization – giving incorrect reasons to
justify your position.
Example: She doesn’t believe in global warming
because she likes using hairspray.
14. Red Herring – presenting an argument unrelated
to your subject in order to distract the reader.
Example: In order to really look at the problem of
global warming, we must first consider how the
homeless suffer when it is cold.
15. Slippery Slope – implying that one small step in
the wrong direction will cause catastrophic results.
Example:If we use just one more can of hairspray
this month, earth as we know it will no longer exist.
16. Two wrongs make a right – defending something done
wrong by citing another incident of wrong doing.
Example: American does not need to regulate pollution
because China is producing more pollution than we are.
17. Straw Man – an argument in which an opponent’s
position is represented as being more extreme than it
actually is.
Example: Al gore feels that all companies are irresponsible
and should be punished for allowing emissions which
causes global warming.
18. Equivocation – juvenile tricks of language.
Example: If there really is global warming, how
come it is cooler in Fullerton this year?
19. Non Sequitur – arguments in which claims,
resons, or warrants fail to connect logically. “It
does not follow”.
Example: We should stop using airspray because
it is snowing in New York.
Being a critical reader means
knowing the different flaws in logic
and being able to apply them in
evaluating things that you hear or
read and not to make unqualified
statements as well.(Saqueton and
Uychoco)
Exercise:
1. What does it mean to be a critical
reader?
2. Why is critical reading considered
an active process of discovery?
3. Why is critical reading important?
In what way is critical reading related
to critical writing?