FRESHMAN COMPOSITION, RHETORIC, GRAMMAR II

&

INTRO. TO LITERARY RESEARCH & WRITING

INSTRUCTOR: James Maxfield

Appeals to Force or Threat—if you don’t believe me, you’ll be sorry later.

Appeals to Pity—"Judge, I did it because I was upset about losing my job."

Appeals to the People—"Surely everyone knows this to be true." (Also referred to as the Bandwagon argument)—everyone else is doing it, so why shouldn’t I do it too?

Appeals to Vanity or Celebrity—Michael Jackson did it, so it must be O.K.

Appeals to Snobbery—All of the well-to-do people have this, so if you want to be like them, you should get one too. (Used frequently in persuasive advertising)

Appeals to Authority—using testimony of an unqualified third party who is an authority figure

Appeals to Ignorance—reading a conclusion that is based on inconclusive evidence

Fallacy of Accident—when a general rule is applied incorrectly to a specific case

Hasty Generalization—when you base your conclusion on evidence that is not representative of the group—mostly used with inductive reasoning: your specific evidence is faulty, so your generalization will also be faulty.

Fallacy of False Cause—when your conclusion is based on an imagined or non-existent connections between your premises and evidence.

Post hoc ergo propter hoc (a form of the False Cause fallacy) means "after this, therefore on account of this")—this fallacy asserts that just because one event has occurred after another event, that the second event was caused by the first event.

Missing the Point—where the conclusion of the argument is irrelevant to the premises. Also known as Drawing the Wrong Conclusion from the given facts or evidence.

Argument ad hominem—attacking the person instead of his argument or reasoning

--abusive—a direct attack of the person (verbal abuse)

--verbally discredit the person (by referring to other past circumstances)

--shifting the argument—"two wrongs don’t make a right"

Begging the Question—The argument asks us to believe a statement without proof. We are convinced or deceived to believe that something is fact, when it hasn’t yet been proven. Sometime the conclusion is used to support the premise. This might also be referred to as circular reasoning. That is, the premise and the conclusion might say nearly the same thing in different words.

3 requirements are necessary for this fallacy to occur: the argument must be valid; one premise must be false or questionable; and the questionable premise must be obscured within the argument (either intentionally or by accident).

Example: Scientists are very intelligent people because if they weren’t highly intelligent they wouldn’t be scientists.

Equivocation—when the conclusion of an argument depends on the fact that one or more words in the argument are used in two different senses.

Example: We have a duty to do what is right. We have a right to freedom of speech. Therefore, we have a duty to speak out as we choose.

Example: Mary, I know you will lend me your sweater today. After all, I’m sure you don’t want mother to learn that you skipped school yesterday. (This might also be an appeal to force.)

Amphiboly—drawing the wrong conclusion because a premise was structurally ambiguous.

Example: Kathy told Diane that she made a mistake. It’s good to know that Kathy is someone who has the guts to admit her own mistakes.

Example: Mary said that she was interviewing for a job writing articles in the editor’s office. I assume that the editor enjoys working with a "team" approach.

The Fallacy of Accent—occurs when a statement premise is misinterpreted. This can result from an ambiguous wording or structure or by emphasizing a certain word in the statement.

Example: John said that he did not drive his car today.

This fallacy often results when the person making the argument intends for you to misinterpret the statement.

Example: Paul said that he is not inviting John’s brother to his party. Therefore, he must be inviting his sister.

Logical Fallacies—cont.

The Red Herring—occurs when the arguer diverts attention to extraneous or minor issues (which are usually true) and ends by presuming a conclusion has been established for the entire argument. The arguer ignores the other person’s argument and subtly changes focus of the subject.

Example:

The Straw Man—the arguer (intentionally) misinterprets the argument of more easily attack it. After "knocking down" the grossly simplified argument, he asserts his conclusion.

Example:

Oversimplification—(related to the Straw Man Fallacy)—attempting to simplify a complex argument by ignoring critical information or inconsistencies of facts or premises:

Example: Attending La Maze classes will make men better fathers.

Slippery Slope—(similar to fallacy of false cause)—occurs when the conclusion for an argument depends upon a claim that a certain (unlikely) event will start a series of subsequent events. This fallacious argument model frequently includes appeals of emotion and predictions of catastrophe.

Example: The "domino theory" argument supporting the Viet Nam War.

Non Sequitur (It Does Not Follow)—reaching an incorrect conclusion based on the evidence presented.

Example: Because fewer high school students today enter college upon graduation, they must not be interested in a rewarding careers.

Either / Or Reasoning—occurs when we suggest that there are only two possible outcomes to an argument, when in reality there are many.

Example: Unless Latin is reintroduced into high schools and made a required subject in ninth grade, English proficiency will continue to decline.

Example: Either we should increase taxes or we should cut spending.

Send mail to james.maxfield@tri-c.edu with questions or comments about this web site.
Copyright © 2005 Cuyahoga Community College
Last modified: 04/30/06