Informal fallacies

Question 1

• Using popular belief in a proposition as evidence that the proposition is true.
  E.g. Everyone says Steve from Blue’s clues died while doing the show, why wouldn’t you believe that?

Answer 1

Appeal to majority (bandwagon arguments)

Question 2

• Attacks a trait of the arguer to undermine the arguer’s point, instead of attacking the argument itself.
  
  • Not to be confused with an insult
  • There can be truth relevant traits of an arguer
    E.g. “The governor is an idiot, so she obviously has a terrible tax plan.”

Answer 2

Ad Hominem

Question 3

• Uses the claims of an overseer on facts that aren’t relevant to the argument to add credibility to the argument
  
  • can be legitimate
  • Can still give true outcome, just doesn’t give good reason to think it’s true
  • E.g. “Philosophy is useless! all the famous astrophysicists say so!”

Answer 3

Appeal to authority

Question 4

• Presents a limited set of alternatives as though they are the only ones, when there may be others
  
  • E.g. “either we keep cannabis illegal or everyone dies on the road”

Answer 4

False Dichotomy (false dilemma)

Question 5

• Uses lack of evidence for the opposing proposition as evidence that the presented proposition is true.
  
  • E.g. “Covid-19 is a hoax.”
    “But there is no evidence for that”
    “Well, you can’t show me that it isn’t”

Answer 5

Appeal to ignorance/evidence

Question 6

• Wilfully misrepresenting an opponent’s argument so that it looks superficially similar but it is much easier to attack
  
  • E.g. “I favour small government because it promotes economic development.”
    “Oh I see you mean that you favour small government because it helps you and your greasy friends get rich.”

Answer 6

Straw man

Question 7

• Sliding from one relatively likely event, to progressively less and less likely events in ways that make the casual chain seem inevitable.
  
  • E.g. “If we refrain from regulating the economy the rich will get richer and the poor will get poorer until we ultimately revert to some extreme Hobbesian state of nature.”

Answer 7

Slippery slope

Question 8

• Claiming that certain events are caused by previous events with no casual link.
  
  • E.g. “Shortly after the all blacks thrashed Whales for third place in the Rugby World Cup, covid hit the world. The cause was clearly the rugby.”

Answer 8

Post Hoc (False cause)

Question 9

• Assessing the truth of a claim by its origin or history, as opposed to its relevance or truth.
  
  • E.g. “Clearly morality is merely an evolved trait that allowed us to work together more successfully, therefore there aren’t any moral facts in the world.”
  • My parents told me God exists, therefore God exists.

Answer 9

Genetic fallacy

Question 10

• Uses the fact that people have historically believed a proposition to be true as evidence that the proposition is true.
  
  • E.g. “We always did that so it must be right.”

Answer 10

Argument from Tradition

Question 11

• Uses a proposition as a premise in an argument that is intended to defend that very proposition
  
  • Can be informal or formal
  • E.g. “How do you know that you can trust National? Well, in National commercials they said that NZ would be in good hands with National.”

Answer 11

Begging the question

Question 12

• Draws a general conclusion on the basis of insufficient evidence (stereotypes)
  
  • E.g. Oh you’re a conservative, you must hate the idea of a carbon tax.”
  • Not all are quick

Answer 12

Hasty generalisation

Question 13

• Uses the same word or phrase to mean two different things
  
  • E.g. How do you feel about ice cream?
    It’s good
    So you feel good about the environmental horrific issues the dairy industry is causing

Answer 13

Equivocation (ambiguity)

Question 14

• Changing what is at issue in an argument in a way that distracts from the issue at hand
  E.g. “Cheating on test is wrong. But what is morality anyway?”

Answer 14

Red herring

Question 15

• Asks a question informed by implicit assumptions

Hello Bill, are you still an alcoholic?”

Answer 15

Loaded question

Question 16

• Uses the attributes of individuals as evidence that the group has that attribute
  
  • E.g. “Oxygen isn’t wet. Hydrogen isn’t wet. An H2O molecule isn’t wet so water clearly isn’t wet.”
• example: “Te Amai can’t lift a car, thus his basketball team can’t lift a car.”

Answer 16

Fallacy of Composition

Question 17

• Raising the standard of evidence after adequate evidence has already been presented
  
  • Essentially changing your argument constantly
  • E.g. “A causes B.
    No it doesn’t (evidence)
    Well, C causes B then.

Answer 17

Moving the goalposts

Question 18

• Setting up criteria for a certain argument, then redefining the criteria to exclude certain outcomes
  
  • E.g. No person does this
    I’m a person and I do
    Well no actual person does this

Answer 18

No true Scotsman (appeal to purity)

Question 19

• Using the attributes of the group as evidence that individuals have that attribute
  • example: “Why are you so afraid of leaves?
    Because I know that if a tree falls on me, I’ll die, so if ay part of a tree falls on me, guess what, I’ll die.”
  • Human constructs are human ideas around modes of human knowing

Answer 19

Fallacy of division