What is a fallacy?
A type of argument that seems to be correct, but contains a mistake in reasoning.
What are the four categories of fallacy?
What are the seven fallacies of relevance? Give an example of each.
What are the four fallacies of defective induction? Give an example of each.
What are the three fallacies of presumption? Give an example of each.
What are the five fallacies of ambiguity?
What characterizes a fallacy of relevance?
The premises of the argument are not relevant to the conclusion.
What characterizes a fallacy of defective induction?
The premises of the argument are relevant but so weak and ineffective that one should not rely on them.
What characterizes a fallacy of presumption?
Too much is assumed in the premises.
What characterizes a fallacy of ambiguity (or “sophism”)?
Equivocal use of words/phrases.
Latin term: appeal to the populace.
Ad populum.
Latin term: appeal to pity.
Ad misericordium.
Definition: appeal to the populace.
An informal fallacy in which the support given for some conclusion is an appeal to popular belief.
Definition: appeal to pity.
A fallacy in which the argument relies on generosity, altruism, or mercy, rather than on reason.
Latin term: appeal to envy.
Ad invidiam.
Latin term: appeal to fear.
Ad metum.
Latin term: appeal to hatred.
Ad odium.
Latin term: appeal to pride.
Ad superbium.
Definition: the red herring.
A fallacy in which attention is deliberately deflected away from the issue under discussion.
Definition: the straw man.
A fallacy in which an opponent’s position is depicted as being more extreme or unreasonable than is justified by what was actually asserted.
Latin term: argument against the person.
Ad hominem.
Definition: argument against the person.
A fallacy in which the argument relies upon an attack against the person taking a position. Can be abusive or circumstantial (subset).
Definition: tu quoque.
“Look who’s talking.” Ad hominem (attack that says “you are just as bad as I am”).
Definition: poisoning the well.
A variety of abusive ad hominem argument in which continued rational exchange is undermined by attacking the good faith or intellectual honesty of the opponent.