Fallacies of Insufficient

Evidence
Slippery Slope
• This fallacy occurs when the arguer assumes that a chain reaction will
occur but there is insufficient evidence that one (or more) events in
the chain will cause the others.
• Never buy a lottery ticket. People who buy lottery tickets soon find that they
want to gamble on horses. Next, they develop a strong urge to go to Las Vegas
and bet their life savings in the casinos. The addiction to gambling gradually
ruins their family life. Eventually, they die, homeless and lonely.
Slippery Slope...
• “Catastrophizing”
• I told a joke at the party. It flopped. So, everyone there thought I was a loser.
So, I’ll never be invited again. In fact, if word gets out, I won’t be invited
anywhere. And I’m sure they’re all talking about my stupid joke. So, I’ve
completely ruined my chances for a decent social life. There’s nothing left for
me now but years of loneliness and misery. How I wish I’d never told that
joke!
Loaded or Complex Question
• Asking a question that illegitimately presupposes some conclusion
alluded to in the question.
• Have you stopped beating your wife?

• Who is the governor of Punjab?

• Will you please be kind and loan me $100?

Loaded or Complex Question...
• A loaded question is not the same as a leading question
• Attorney: Is it true that on the afternoon of February 4 you saw the defendant enter
the Starbucks Coffee Shop at the corner of Boston and Queen Anne Streets?
• Witness: Yes.
• Attorney: And is it true that you saw the defendant reach into his coat pocket and
pull out a knife?
• Witness: Yes.
• Attorney: Did the knife have serrated edge?
• Witness: Yes.
• Attorney: Did the defendant point the knife at a man standing behind the cash
register and say, “Open the cash register or die”?
• Witness: Yes.
Loaded or Complex Question...
• Why is math so boring? Probably because it’s so abstract.
• What time is it now?
Hasty Generalization
• The hasty generalization fallacy occurs when there is a reasonable
likelihood that the sample is not representative of the group. Such a
likelihood may arise if the sample is either too small or not randomly
selected.
• After only one year the alternator went out in Mr. Hasan’s new Civic. Mrs.
Ahmed’s City developed a transmission problem after six months. The
obvious conclusion is that cars made by Honda are just a pile of junk these
days
• “My experience with my ex-wife was such a bad one that I have no intention
of ever marrying again. In fact, I wouldn’t recommend marriage to anyone.”
Hasty Generalization...
• Ten Arab fundamentalists hijacked planes and crashed them into the
World Trade Centre in New York City. The message is clear: Arabs are
nothing but a pack of religious fanatics prone to violence.
• “Vitamin C really works. Every member of my family used to have at
least one winter cold every year. Last fall each of us started taking one
thousand milligrams of vitamin C a day, and there hasn’t been even a
sniffle at our house in more than nine months.”
Hasty Generalization...
• Since each member of my family for nine months has been taking one
thousand milligrams of vitamin C daily, (premise)
• and during that period we have had no colds, (premise)
• and during the previous cold season, we each had at least one cold,
(premise)
• [and the sample of one family is a sufficient sample to determine
what is true for all people,] (implicit premise)
• Therefore, a vitamin C therapy of one thousand milligrams daily will
prevent the common cold. (conclusion)
Fallacy of Inconsistency
• One who attempts to advance an argument that is self-contradictory
commits a fallacy of inconsistency.
• An argument that uses premises that are not compatible with one
another cannot function as a good argument, for it cannot lead one to
an acceptable or true conclusion.
• Since A, (premise)
and not-A, (premise)
[No acceptable conclusion can be drawn.]
Fallacy of Inconsistency...
• A politician says he will maintain or increase all present governmental
services and also lower taxes.
• Difference between real and apparent inconsistencies
Example
• The following statement is true
The preceding statement is false
Analyzing Arguments
Analyzing Arguments
• Examine the structure of the argument

• Start with identifying the Conclusion and premises

Diagramming Arguments
• It’s clear that we should eliminate the death penalty. First, the
financial costs of capital punishment are significantly greater than
those of keeping someone in prison for life. Second, the death penalty
has no greater deterrent value than life in prison without parole.
Diagramming Arguments
• Not every sentence is a statement or a claim
• Indicator words should not be made part of the identification of
statements
• Multiple statements can be expressed in a single sentence
• ➀ Cocaine is a drug, and ➁ drugs are addictive.
• Two statements can be joined together in ways that transform them
into a single statement
• ➀ If cocaine is a drug, then it is addictive.
Diagramming Arguments
• Sometimes it may be challenging to identify when a single sentence
contains more than one statement because the sentence uses a
parenthetical phrase or buries one statement within another.
• ➀ Your house must be infested with termites. ➁ There are mud tubes running
from the soil into cracks of masonry on the house, ➂ which could only be
caused by termites.
Diagramming Arguments
• A single statement can be represented by more than one sentence
• ➀ The victim, Sabahat Ali, was stabbed and killed by the defendant, Zeeshan.
➁ Detective Kamran identified Mr. Zeeshan’s DNA on the weapon used to kill
the victim. Therefore, ➀ it was Zeeshan who killed Ms. Ali.
Placing Conclusions and Premises
• ➀ The detective found the defendant’s DNA on the weapon, thus ➁
the defendant must be the killer.
•➀

•➁
Convergent Arguments
• Most arguments have more than one premise supporting the
conclusion.
• You will need to determine the relationship between those premises
and then draw the diagram in a way that reflects this relationship.
• Arguments with premises that independently support the conclusion
are convergent arguments
Convergent Premises
• If one of the premises is false, the conclusion is still supported
because the remaining premises provide independent support for the
conclusion.
• Cocaine is addictive, and it is illegal. Consequently, you should not use
cocaine.
Linked Premises
• When premises depend on each other to support the conclusion, they
are linked
• All of the linked premises must be true in order to support the
conclusion
• If one of the premises is false, the conclusion is no longer supported
• Cocaine is a drug, and drugs are addictive. Therefore, cocaine is addictive.
Representing Convergent and Linked
Arguments
• ➀ Cocaine is addictive, and ➁ it is illegal. Consequently, ➂ you should
not use cocaine.
➀ ➁

➂
➀ Cocaine is a drug, and ➁ drugs are addictive. Therefore, ➂ cocaine is addictive.
➀+➁

➂
Diagramming Arguments with Unstated
Conclusions
• Unless NASA gets congressional approval for its plan to send a new
mission to the moon, the space program will most likely disappear.
And congressional approval seems highly unlikely. The result of this is
obvious, isn’t it
Diagramming Arguments with Unstated
Conclusions
• ➀ Unless NASA gets congressional approval for its plan to send a new
mission to the moon, their space program will most likely disappear.
And ➁ congressional approval seems highly unlikely. ➂ The result of
this is obvious, isn’t it? ➂ The NASA space program will most likely
disappear.
Diagramming Arguments with Unstated
Conclusions
• If you want to do well in this class, then you must work very hard. And
I know you want to do well in this class.
• ➀ If you want to do well in this class, then you must work very hard.
And I know ➁ you want to do well in this class. ➂ You should work
very hard in this class.
Diagramming Arguments with Implied
Claims (Premises)
• Stop playing video games all night. Otherwise, you may develop
carpal tunnel syndrome.
• ➀ Stop playing video games all night. ➁ Otherwise, you may develop
carpal tunnel syndrome. ➀ You should stop playing video games all
night.
Diagramming Arguments with Implied
Claims
• We should keep the death penalty. How could a brutal murderer be
allowed to live?
Diagramming Arguments with Implied
Claims
• ➀ We should keep the death penalty. ➁ How could a brutal murderer
be allowed to live? ➁ Those who brutally murder others should not
be allowed to live.
Example
• The defendant is charged with murder, and the question is whether
the defendant is actually the person who committed the drive-by
shooting of the victim (i.e., there is no question of self-defense or
insanity or accidental death; the only question is the identity of the
person who did the deed).
Example…
• White Jaguar automobiles are quite unusual in this area. The
defendant owns a white Jaguar, and the car from which the fatal shots
were fired has been identified by several witnesses as a white Jaguar.
Therefore, there is some reason to think that the defendant is guilty
of the drive-by murder.
Linked Argument
• The prosecution must prove the defendant’s guilt beyond a
reasonable doubt, and this argument doesn’t come close.
• We have three reasons, all supporting (though not establishing) the
conclusion that the defendant is guilty.