DOCSLIB.ORG

Logical Fallacies

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Logical Fallacies An Introduction “[We] let our young men and women go out unarmed, in a day when armor was never so necessary. By teaching them all to read, we have left them at the mercy of the printed word. By the invention of the film and the radio, we have made certain that no aversion to reading shall secure them from the incessant battery of words, words, words. They do not know what the words mean; they do not know how to ward them off or blunt their edge or fling them back; they are a prey to words in their emotions instead of being the masters of them in their intellects. We who were scandalized in 1940 when men were sent to fight armored tanks with rifles, are not scandalized when young men and women are sent into the world to fight massed propaganda with a smattering of "subjects"; and when whole classes and whole nations become hypnotized by the arts of the spell binder, we have the impudence to be astonished. We dole out lip-service to the importance of education--lip- service and, just occasionally, a little grant of money; we postpone the school-leaving age, and plan to build bigger and better schools; the teachers slave conscientiously in and out of school hours; and yet, as I believe, all this devoted effort is largely frustrated, because we have lost the tools of learning, and in their absence can only make a botched and piecemeal job of it.” “ It is here [in teaching of formal logic] that our curriculum shows its first sharp divergence from modern standards. The disrepute into which Formal Logic has fallen is entirely unjustified; and its neglect is the root cause of nearly all those disquieting symptoms which we have noted in the modern intellectual constitution. Logic has been discredited, partly because we have come to suppose that we are conditioned almost entirely by the intuitive and the unconscious. There is no time to argue whether this is true; I will simply observe that to neglect the proper training of the reason is the best possible way to make it true.” Definitions Reasoning conducted or assessed according to strict principles of validity. Logic studies reason itself as a tool of knowledge. Logic is the study of right reason or valid inferences, and the attending fallacies, formal and informal. Logic means putting your thoughts in order. Definitions Logic is an instrument of human knowledge. As a discipline it involves the study of the science and art of right reasoning that directs the faculty of reason so as to enable one to advance with order, ease, and correctness in the act of reason. Reasons Logic is unavoidable Logic is undeniable Logic works Theological methods build on laws of logic 1. Simple Apprehension 2. Judgement 3. Reasoning Knowledge begins in sense experience What is it? Concept Term Word Clear or Unclear Relating concepts Is it? Judgement Proposition Declarative sentence True or False Relating propositions Why is it? Inductive arguments Deductive arguments Valid or Invalid “There are three questions you should habitually ask yourself when writing or speaking, and of others when you are reading or listening to them.” 1) Are the terms all clear and unambiguous? 2) Are the premises all true? 3)Is the reasoning logically valid? “If the answer to all three these questions is yes, then the conclusion of the argument must be true.” Material Logic Concerned with the content of arguments. Formal Logic Concerns the way in which the content is arranged. Fallacy: A mistake in reasoning. Faulty argumentation. Material fallacies: Mistakes in the content of an argument. Formal fallacies: Mistakes in the structure of an argument. Fallacies of language Equivocation: A term is used in more than one sense in an argument. All laws require lawgivers. Natural laws are laws. Therefore natural laws require a lawgiver. Fallacies of language Slanting: Use of language assumes value or disvalue of a thing in its description. Pro-choice vs. “Anti-choice” Pro-life vs. “Anti-Life” Fallacies of language “Straw man”: Refuting an unfairly weak version of an opponent’s argument. Everything that exists has a cause. The universe exists. Therefore the universe has a cause. Refutation: God exists therefore God has a cause Fallacies of Diversion Ad Hominem: An argument addressed to the person rather than the issue. Poisoning the Well: Since Christopher Hitchens’ had a rather sad and pathetic life his arguments against Christianity cannot be taken seriously. Genetic Fallacy: I cannot accept your arguments against abortion because you are a man. You are a Christian only because you grew up in Lancaster PA. Fallacies of Diversion Appeal to (illegitimate) authority Evolution is false because Kirk Cameron says so. Fallacies of Diversion Ad Baculum (appeal to force) “God is dead,” Nietzsche said “Nietzsche is dead,” God said Fallacies of Diversion Ad Populim (appeal to the masses) “The notion of a timeless truth is based on an outmoded Greek metaphysics that we moderns have rejected.” Fallacies of Diversion Ad Ignorantiam (appeal to ignorance) “We know of no natural cause that could have produced that effect, therefore it must have been a miracle.” Fallacies of Oversimplification Quoting out of Context In Jeremiah 11:29 God says “For I know the plans I have for you,” declares the LORD, “plans to prosper you and not to harm you, plans to give you hope and a future.” Therefore every Christian can expect to be prosperous in this life Fallacies of Oversimplification Composition The 9/11 bombers were Muslims therefore Islam is a violent religion. Fallacies of Argumentation Begging the question All the precepts of the Bible are true (Why?) Because they are the word of God (How do you know?) Because Jesus said so (How do you know he’s truthful) Because he is God’s son (How do you know he is?) Because the Bible says so. How is the married woman able to plan schooling or commit herself to a career as long as her life is constantly open to unplanned pregnancy. Fallacies of Argumentation Contradictory Premises Even if the fetus is a person, I still believe in abortion because I believe in every person’s right to control her body. It is universally true that there are no universal truths. Fallacies of Argumentation Complex Question Does Jesus know the time of the second coming? Who made God? Fallacies of Induction Hasty generalization The New Atheists are all full of vitriol. Look at Richard Dawkins, Daniel Dennett and Christopher Hitchens. Fallacies of Induction Post Hoc Ergo Procter Hoc I must be called to this new pastorate because after I accepted it we sold our house. After couples convert to Christianity their marriages are restored, therefore conversion brings restoration in marriage Fallacies of Induction Argument from Silence The Gospel of John must have been written before A.D.70 since it does not mention the destruction of the temple. Procedural Fallacies Ignoring the Argument Protestant “refutes” the Catholic argument for papal infallibility by pointing out the corrupt Borgia popes (confusing moral infallibility and doctrinal infallibility) but ignores the Catholic arguments from tradition and authority of the church. Procedural Fallacies Answering Another Argument than the One Given “Slavery is morally wrong, it violates a basic human right.” “Oh, I know that argument. You think it’s always wrong to have a slave, because it’s harmful, and makes for suffering and misery. But it doesn’t. Sometimes people are happier as slaves. Sometimes the relationship is a good one. And sometimes slavery is the only other alternative to death. Your argument ignores special cases like that.” Metaphysical Fallacies Reductionism Religion is nothing but an emotional crutch. “Why are you so surprised? said the retired star to the children. “Because in our world a star is only a big ball of gas.” “Even in your world that is not what a star is, only what it is made of.” Anthony Weston, A Rulebook for Arguments Norman Geisler & Ronald M. Brooks, Come Let Us Reason: An Introduction to Logical Thinking. Scott M. Sullivan, An Introduction to Traditional Logic: Classic Reasoning for Contemporary Minds Peter Kreeft, Socratic Logic..
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Ronald Reagan Presidential Library Digital Library Collections This
    Ronald Reagan Presidential Library Digital Library Collections This is a PDF of a folder from our textual collections. Collection: Cohen, Benedict S.: Files Folder Title: Robert Bork – White House Study, Joseph Biden Critique (3 of 3) Box: CFOA 1339 To see more digitized collections visit: https://www.reaganlibrary.gov/archives/digitized-textual-material To see all Ronald Reagan Presidential Library inventories visit: https://www.reaganlibrary.gov/archives/white-house-inventories Contact a reference archivist at: [email protected] Citation Guidelines: https://reaganlibrary.gov/archives/research- support/citation-guide National Archives Catalogue: https://catalog.archives.gov/ ERRORS ANO OMISSIONS IN THE "RESPONSE PREPARED TO WHITE HOUSE ANALYSIS OF JUDGE BORK'S RECORD" September 8, 1987 HIGHLIGHTS ERRORS AND OMISSIONS IN THE "RESPONSE PREPARED TO WHITE HOUSE ANALYSIS OF JUDGE BORK'S RECORD" On Thursday, September 3, Senator Biden issued a report prepared at his request reviewing Judge Bork's record. The report criticized an earlier White House document performing a similar review on the ground that it "contain[ed] a number of inaccuracies" and that "the picture it paint[ed] of Judge Bork is a distortion of his record." It claimed that it would undertake "to depict Judge Bork's record more fully and accurately." In fact, however, the Biden Report is a highly partisan and incomplete portrayal of the nominee. If it were a brief filed on the question, its misleading assertions and omissions go far enough beyond the limits of zealous advocacy to warrant Rule 11 sanctions. It contains at least 81 clear distortions and mischaracterizations. Among the most significant: o The Report claims that Judge Bork's perfect record of nonreversal by the Supreme Court in the more than 400 majority opinions he has written or joined is "uninformative" -- flippantly dismissing the clearest, most extensive, and most recent evidence of Judge Bork's views.
    [Show full text]
  • Gordon, Specious Arguments
    Specious Arguments Dr. T. David Gordon Professor of Greek, Humanities, and Religion Grove City College Introduction Although we commonly use the term “argument” to describe a rather unprofitable, angry exchange of viewpoints, the term has also been used to describe the reasons advanced for embracing a particular viewpoint. This is how I will use the term here. As such, arguments are, of course, vital to the human race. When a particular neurosurgeon “argues” for treating a given patient a given way, he or she is not being argumentative; but rather is contending for a procedure which, it is hoped, will restore the patient to health. The argument is designed to promote life. In a similar way, arguments are vital to advancing the Christian faith. Paul spoke of the “warfare” of the Christian religion in this way: “for the weapons of our warfare are not merely human, but they have divine power to destroy strongholds. We destroy arguments and every proud obstacle raised up against the knowledge of God, and we take every thought captive to obey Christ” (2 Cor. 10:4). Negatively, the Christian faith wages war against false arguments. This explains Paul’s instruction to Titus about bishops: “He must have a firm grasp of the word…, so that he may be able both to preach with sound doctrine and to refute those who contradict it” (Titus 1:9). But positively, the faith is also propagated by setting forth correct and true arguments. The apostle Peter, for instance, “…testified with many other arguments and exhorted them, saying, ‘Save yourselves from this corrupt generation’” (Acts 2:40).
    [Show full text]
  • 10 Fallacies and Examples Pdf
    10 fallacies and examples pdf Continue A: It is imperative that we promote adequate means to prevent degradation that would jeopardize the project. Man B: Do you think that just because you use big words makes you sound smart? Shut up, loser; You don't know what you're talking about. #2: Ad Populum: Ad Populum tries to prove the argument as correct simply because many people believe it is. Example: 80% of people are in favor of the death penalty, so the death penalty is moral. #3. Appeal to the body: In this erroneous argument, the author argues that his argument is correct because someone known or powerful supports it. Example: We need to change the age of drinking because Einstein believed that 18 was the right age of drinking. #4. Begging question: This happens when the author's premise and conclusion say the same thing. Example: Fashion magazines do not harm women's self-esteem because women's trust is not damaged after reading the magazine. #5. False dichotomy: This misconception is based on the assumption that there are only two possible solutions, so refuting one decision means that another solution should be used. It ignores other alternative solutions. Example: If you want better public schools, you should raise taxes. If you don't want to raise taxes, you can't have the best schools #6. Hasty Generalization: Hasty Generalization occurs when the initiator uses too small a sample size to support a broad generalization. Example: Sally couldn't find any cute clothes in the boutique and couldn't Maura, so there are no cute clothes in the boutique.
    [Show full text]
  • Britain in Psychological Distress: the EU Referendum and the Psychological Operations of the Two Opposing Sides
    SCHOOL OF SOCIAL SCIENCES, HUMANITIES AND ARTS DEPARTMENT OF INTERNATIONAL AND EUROPEAN STUDIES MASTER’S DEGREE OF INTERNATIONAL PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION Britain in psychological distress: The EU referendum and the psychological operations of the two opposing sides By: Eleni Mokka Professor: Spyridon Litsas MIPA Thessaloniki, 2019 TABLE OF CONTENTS Summary ……………………………………………………………………………… 5 INTRODUCTION ……………………………………………………………………. 6 CHAPTER ONE: OVERVIEW OF PSYCHOLOGICAL OPERATIONS ………….. 7 A. Definition and Analysis …………………………………………………………… 7 B. Propaganda: Techniques involving Language Manipulation …………………….. 11 1. Basic Propaganda Devices ……………………………………………………... 11 2. Logical Fallacies ……………………………………………………………….. 20 C. Propaganda: Non-Verbal Techniques …………………………………………… 25 1. Opinion Polls …………………………………………………………………… 25 2. Statistics ………………………………………………………………………… 32 CHAPTER TWO: BRITAIN‟S EU REFERENDUM ………………………………. 34 A. Euroscepticism in Britain since 70‟s ……………………………………………... 34 B. Brexit vs. Bremain: Methods, Techniques and Rhetoric …………………………. 43 1. Membership, Designation and Campaigns‟ Strategy …………………………… 44 1.a. „Leave‟ Campaign …………………………………………………………… 44 1.b. „Remain‟ Campaign …………………………………………………………. 50 1.c. Labour In for Britain ………………………………………………………… 52 1.d. Conservatives for Britain ……………………………………………………. 52 2. The Deal ………………………………………………………………………… 55 3. Project Fear …………………………………………………………………..…. 57 4. Trade and Security; Barack Obama‟s visit ……………………………………... 59 3 5. Budget and Economic Arguments ……………………………………………… 62 6. Ad Hominem
    [Show full text]
  • Response Opposing Committee to Bridge the Gap 820920 Motion To
    . - . .- . ...-A 00CMETED USHRC 0)I I4 AN :54 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA WI..E5f, t Tr ' - NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION ' BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD , __ _ In the Matter of ) ) Docket No. 50-142 THE REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY ) (Proposed Renewal of Facility OF CALIFORNIA ) License Number R-71) ) (UCLA Research Reactor) ) October 8, 1982 ) , UNIVERSITY'S RESPONSE TO CBG'S MOTION OF SEPTEMBER 20, 1982 ! DONALD L. REIDHAAR GLENN R. WOODS CHRISTINE HELWICK 590 University Hall 2200 University Avenue Berkeley, California 94720 Telephone: (415) 642-2822 Attorneys for Applicant- ! THE REGERTS OF THE UNIVCRSITY .._ OF CALIFORNIA 8210150456 821008 PDR ADOCK 05000142 O PDR ' .. - - . I. INTRODUCTION In its Order dated September 28, 1982 the Board suspended the schedule for responses to summary disposition motions and directed the parties to respond to CBG's " Motion __ to Summarily Dismiss Staff and Applicant Motions for Summary Disposition, or Alternative Relief as to Same," (the Motion) ' dated September 20, 1982. The parties were also directed to respond to the City of Santa Monica's ' letter of September 20, | 1982 requesting an entension of time to respond to the summary i disposition motions. The Board requested that the parties' responses be received by October 8, 1982. I -- University objects to all manner of specific relief requested by CBG in its Motion as unwarranted under the Commission's Rules of Practice ' considered in light of the particular circumstances of this proceeding. Properly construed the Commission's rules preclude the summary dismissal of the Staff and University motions since those motions have not been 'subinitted shortly before a hearing that is set to commence or t which has commenced, but instead according to the schedule specifically set by the Board for the filing of such motions.
    [Show full text]
  • The Battle Over the Burden of Proof: a Report from the Trenches University of Pittsburgh Law Review
    UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH LAW REVIEW Vol. 79 ● Fall 2017 THE BATTLE OVER THE BURDEN OF PROOF: A REPORT FROM THE TRENCHES Michael D. Cicchini ISSN 0041-9915 (print) 1942-8405 (online) ● DOI 10.5195/lawreview.2017.525 http://lawreview.law.pitt.edu This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 United States License. This site is published by the University Library System of the University of Pittsburgh as part of its D- Scribe Digital Publishing Program and is cosponsored by the University of Pittsburgh Press. THE BATTLE OVER THE BURDEN OF PROOF: A REPORT FROM THE TRENCHES Michael D. Cicchini* Table of Contents Introduction ............................................................................................................ 63 I. The Burden of Proof Jury Instruction ............................................................ 64 A. The Trouble with Truth-Based Instructions .......................................... 65 B. A Simple Thought Experiment ............................................................. 67 C. The Empirical Studies ........................................................................... 68 D. A Seemingly Simple Request ................................................................ 70 II. Prosecutor Arguments Regarding the Studies ............................................... 71 A. The Participants Who Voted “Guilty” Could Have Been Right............ 71 B. Actual Jurors Are Needed to Test a Jury Instruction............................. 72 C. The Studies
    [Show full text]
  • Turning Sexual Science Into News: Sex Research and the Media
    Sex Research and the Media -- 1 Turning Sexual Science into News: Sex Research and the Media Kimberly R. McBride, Ph.D.1,2, Stephanie A. Sanders, Ph.D.2,3, Erick Janssen, Ph.D.2,4,Maria Elizabeth Grabe, Ph.D.5 , Jennifer Bass, M.P.H.2, Johnny V. Sparks, Ph.D.6,Trevor R. Brown, Ph.D.7, Julia R. Heiman, Ph.D.2,4,8 1 Section of Adolescent Medicine, Department of Pediatrics, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, Indiana 2 The Kinsey Institute for Research in Sex, Gender, and Reproduction, Indiana University, Bloomington, Indiana 3 Department of Gender Studies, Indiana University, Bloomington, Indiana 4 Department of Psychological and Brain Sciences, Indiana University, Bloomington, Indiana 5 Department of Telecommunications, Indiana University, Bloomington, Indiana 6 Department of Telecommunication, University of Alabama, Tuscaloosa, Alabama 7 School of Journalism, Indiana University, Bloomington, Indiana 8 To whom correspondence should be addressed at The Kinsey Institute for Research in Sex, Gender, and Reproduction, Morrison Hall 313, 1165 East Third Street, Bloomington, Indiana 47405-3700; email [email protected] Keywords: SEX RESEARCH; SEXUALITY; MEDIA; JOURNALISM; MEDIA TRAINING Sex Research and the Media -- 2 Abstract In this article we report on the findings of a two-part project investigating contemporary issues in sexuality researchers’ interaction with journalists. The goal of the project was to explore best practices and suggest curricular and training initiatives for sexuality researchers and journalists that would enhance the accurate dissemination of sexuality research findings in the media. We present the findings of a survey of a convenience sample of 94 sexuality researchers about their experiences and concerns regarding media coverage and a summary of the main themes that emerged from an invitational conference of sexuality researchers and journalists.
    [Show full text]
  • Common Reasoning Mistakes
    Common Fallacies (mistakes of reasoning) The fallacy fallacy • There is danger even in the study of fallacies. This study involves identifying certain patterns of reasoning as fallacies. Each pattern has a name. E.g. an argument that attacks a person is ad hominem. But ad hominem arguments are not always fallacies! • Rejecting an argument as a (named) fallacy, based on its pattern alone, is a fallacy that we might call the fallacy fallacy. • In general, an ad hominem is only legitimate when attacking an argument from authority. • But not all such attacks on authority are legitimate. They can be made on irrelevant grounds. Irrelevant ad hominem E.g. Einstein’s physics was attacked on the basis of Einstein being Jewish. Thomas Powers, Heisenberg’s War, p. 41 Fallacy? • Alliance leader Stockwell Day argues that Canada should increase its military expenditure now, by at least 20%, in order to continue to meet our NATO obligations five years from now. But Day is a fundamentalist who thinks the universe is only 6,000 years old! Clearly his view can be dismissed. • Probably a fallacy. If Day is presenting evidence (e.g. based on future NATO obligations) then an ad hominem response is automatically fallacious. Even if Day is arguing from authority, then his (religion based) views about the age of the earth are likely not relevant to his views about military needs. • Mr. Wilson, in his letter of January 16, argues that it would be counter-productive to yield to the demands of the hostage takers. He does not, I take it, have a son or daughter among the hostages.
    [Show full text]
  • Public Speaking in the Church Notes WESTERN REFORMED SEMINARY, LAKEWOOD, WASHINGTON DR
    Public Speaking in the Church Notes WESTERN REFORMED SEMINARY, LAKEWOOD, WASHINGTON DR. LEONARD W. PINE, PROFESSOR FALL 2020 BASIC PRINCIPLES FOR EFFECTIVE SPEAKERS 1. The effective speaker is a person whose character, knowledge, and judgement command respect. 2. The effective speaker has a message to deliver, has a definite purpose in giving that message, and is consumed with the necessity of getting that message across and accomplishing that purpose. 3. The effective speaker realizes that the primary purpose of speech is the communication of ideas and feelings in order to get a desired response. 4. The effective speaker analyzes and adjusts to every speaking situation. 5. The effective speaker chooses topics which are significant and appropriate. 6. The effective speaker reads and listens with discernment. (Neither blindly accepting the ideas of others, nor stubbornly refusing to consider opinions opposed to his own.) 7. The effective Speaker secures facts and opinions through sound research and careful thought so that his speech, both on and off the platform, may be worthy of the listener's time. 8. The effective speaker selects and organizes materials so that they form a unified and coherent whole. 9. The effective speaker uses language that is clear, direct, appropriate, and vivid. 10. The effective speaker makes his delivery vital and keeps it free from distracting elements. THE PROCESS OF COMMUNICATION I. Defining Communication "The process of sending and receiving information that results in the receiver's accurate comprehension of the intended message." II. Characteristics of Communication A. Dynamic Neither a chain reaction not a static event, but an ongoing process/experience.
    [Show full text]
  • Think Critically (Pdf)
    Think Critically! Level: High school and Higher Education (16-20) Author: Nicole Fournier-Sylvester Overview An important strategy for addressing hate speech is to work with youth to develop and apply critical thinking skills to the social media platforms that they engage with every day. By equipping young people with the skills to recognize propaganda and manipulation techniques they will become better positioned to evaluate arguments and engage in meaningful discussions. Based on the insights of college and university teachers who have used www.newsactivist.com to this end, the following exercises, rubrics and examples of interventions provide concrete strategies to develop the critical thinking skills of students through online discussions. The integrated comment boxes are meant to encourage feedback and an exchange of ideas and resources between teachers who share this commitment. Learning Objectives To recognize errors in reasoning, propaganda and manipulation techniques as presented in social media To assess the credibility of online sources To apply critical thinking skills in online discussions on social and political issues by engaging in systematic questioning and ongoing reflection Duration The following guidelines are meant to be flexible and adaptable to a variety of learning settings. Although teachers/facilitators are encouraged to tailor content based on their contexts, the sequencing of the units should be maintained. Ideally, learners should be able to commit to two hours a week to complete readings and exercises
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix 1 a Great Big List of Fallacies
    Why Brilliant People Believe Nonsense Appendix 1 A Great Big List of Fallacies To avoid falling for the "Intrinsic Value of Senseless Hard Work Fallacy" (see also "Reinventing the Wheel"), I began with Wikipedia's helpful divisions, list, and descriptions as a base (since Wikipedia articles aren't subject to copyright restrictions), but felt free to add new fallacies, and tweak a bit here and there if I felt further explanation was needed. If you don't understand a fallacy from the brief description below, consider Googling the name of the fallacy, or finding an article dedicated to the fallacy in Wikipedia. Consider the list representative rather than exhaustive. Informal fallacies These arguments are fallacious for reasons other than their structure or form (formal = the "form" of the argument). Thus, informal fallacies typically require an examination of the argument's content. • Argument from (personal) incredulity (aka - divine fallacy, appeal to common sense) – I cannot imagine how this could be true, therefore it must be false. • Argument from repetition (argumentum ad nauseam) – signifies that it has been discussed so extensively that nobody cares to discuss it anymore. • Argument from silence (argumentum e silentio) – the conclusion is based on the absence of evidence, rather than the existence of evidence. • Argument to moderation (false compromise, middle ground, fallacy of the mean, argumentum ad temperantiam) – assuming that the compromise between two positions is always correct. • Argumentum verbosium – See proof by verbosity, below. • (Shifting the) burden of proof (see – onus probandi) – I need not prove my claim, you must prove it is false. • Circular reasoning (circulus in demonstrando) – when the reasoner begins with (or assumes) what he or she is trying to end up with; sometimes called assuming the conclusion.
    [Show full text]
  • Master List of Logical Fallacies
    Master List of Logical Fallacies Fallacies are fake or deceptive arguments, arguments that prove nothing. Fallacies often seem superficially sound, and far too often have immense persuasive power, even after being clearly exposed as false. Fallacies are not always deliberate, but a good scholar’s purpose is always to identify and unmask fallacies in arguments. Ad Hominem Argument: Also, "personal attack," "poisoning the well." The fallacy of attempting to refute an argument by attacking the opposition’s personal character or reputation, using a corrupted negative argument from ethos. E.g., "He's so evil that you can't believe anything he says." See also Guilt by Association. Also applies to cases where valid opposing evidence and arguments are brushed aside without comment or consideration, as simply not worth arguing about. Appeal to Closure. The contemporary fallacy that an argument, standpoint, action or conclusion must be accepted, no matter how questionable, or else the point will remain unsettled and those affected will be denied "closure." This refuses to recognize the truth that some points will indeed remain unsettled, perhaps forever. (E.g., "Society would be protected, crime would be deterred and justice served if we sentence you to life without parole, but we need to execute you in order to provide some sense of closure.") (See also "Argument from Ignorance," "Argument from Consequences.") Appeal to Heaven: (also Deus Vult, Gott mit Uns, Manifest Destiny, the Special Covenant). An extremely dangerous fallacy (a deluded argument from ethos) of asserting that God (or a higher power) has ordered, supports or approves one's own standpoint or actions so no further justification is required and no serious challenge is possible.
    [Show full text]