TARGET JRF DECEMBER 2019

TYPES OF FALLACIES
CLASS 2

BY TALVIR SINGH
Referral Code – TalvirS
Get Extra Discount
• 10. The Causal Fallacy/False Cause - is any logical breakdown when identifying a
cause. You can think of the Causal Fallacy as a parent category for several
different fallacies about unproven causes.
• One causal fallacy is the False Cause ornon causapro causa("not the-cause for a
cause") fallacy, which is when you conclude about a cause without enough
evidence to do so.
• Example-“Since your parents named you ‘Harvest,’ they must be farmers.”
• It’s possible that the parents are farmers, but that name alone is not enough
evidence to draw that conclusion. That name doesn’t tell us much of anything
about the parents. This claim commits the False Cause Fallacy.
• 2-Jimmy isn’t at school today. He must be on a family trip.
• 11. Fallacy of Sunk Costs “Sunk cost” is an economic term for any past expenses
that can no longer be recovered.
• Sometimes we invest ourselves so thoroughly in a project that we’re reluctant to
ever abandon it, even when it turns out to be fruitless and futile.
• It’s natural, and usually not a fallacy to want to carry on with something we find
important, not least because of all the resources we’ve put into it.

Example
“I know this relationship isn’t working
anymore and that we’re both
miserable. No marriage. No kids. No
steady job. But I’ve been with him for
seven years, so I’d better stay with
him.”
• However, this kind of thinking becomes a fallacy when we start to think that We
should continue with a task or project because of all that we’ve put into it,
without considering the future costs we’re likely to incur by doing so.
• There may be a sense of accomplishment when finishing, and the project might
have other values, but it’s not enough to justify the cost invested in it.
• 12. Appeal to Authority (argumentum ad verecundiam)
• This fallacy happens when we misuse an authority.
• This misuse of authority can occur in a number of ways. We can cite only authorities—
 steering conveniently away from other testable and concrete evidence as if expert
opinion is always correct. Or we can cite irrelevant authorities, poor authorities, or false
authorities.
• Example Consider the following examples. How do these statements mishandle
authorities?
• 1: “Because Martin Sheen played the president on television, he’d probably make a great
president in real life.”
• 2: “One day robots will enslave us all. It’s true. My computer science teacher says so.”
• 3: “This internet news site said that the candidate punches babies. We know that’s true
because it’s on the internet.”
• Like many of the other fallacies in this list, The argumentum ad
verecundiam(“argument from respect”) can be hard to spot. It’s tough to see,
sometimes, because its normally a good responsible move to cite relevant
authorities supporting your claim. It can’t hurt.
• But if all you have are authorities, and everyone just has to “take their word for
it” without any other evidence to show that those authorities are correct, well
then you have a problem.
• These fallacies occur when someone accepts a truth on blind faith just because
someone they admire said it.
• Example-Katherine loves Tom Cruise. One day, she meets Tom Cruise and he tells
her unicorns live in New York City. Without day, she meets Tom Cruise and he
tells her unicorns live in New York City. Without searching to find out if fairy
tales have sprung to life in the midtown Manhattan, she believes it to be true.
• 13. Equivocation (ambiguity)
• Equivocation happens when a word, phrase, or sentence is used deliberately to confuse, deceive, or
mislead by sounding like it’s saying one thing but actually saying something else.
• Equivocation comes from the roots “equal” and “voice” and refers to two-voices; a single word can
“say” two different things. Another word for this is ambiguity.
• Example- replacing "fired from my job" with "early retirement.
• When these replacement words are used to mislead people they become an equivocation fallacy.
Example 1: “His political party wants to spend your precious tax dollars on big government.
But my political party is planning strategic federal investment in critical programs.”
Example 2: “I don’t understand why you’re saying I broke a promise. I said I’d never speak
again to my ex-girlfriend. And I didn’t. I just sent her some pictures and text messages.”
• 14. Appeal to Pity (argumentum ad misericordiam) a fallacy of relevance.
Personal attacks, and emotional appeals, aren’t strictly relevant to whether
something is true or false.
• In this case, the fallacy appeals to the compassion and emotional sensitivity of
others when case, the fallacy appeals to the compassion and emotional
sensitivity of others when these factors are not strictly relevant to the argument.
Appeals to pity often appear as emotional manipulation.
• Example -“How can you eat that innocent little potato? He was plucked from his
home in the ground at a young age, and violently skinned, chemically treated,
and packaged, and shipped to your local grocer and now you are going to eat
him into oblivion when he did nothing to you. You really should reconsider what
you put into your body.”
• These fallacies occur when someone seeks to gain acceptance by
pointing out an unfortunate consequence that befalls them.
• If we don't adopt that puppy today, they might put him down. Do
you want to be responsible for that?
• 15. Bandwagon Fallacy The bandwagon fallacy assumes something
is true (or right, or good) because other people agree with it.
• These fallacies occur when a proposition is claimed to be true or
good solely because many people believe it to be so.
• Example-
• Everyone on campus is wearing Adidas. I need to buy those
sneakers.
• All my friends are doing a keto diet. That must be the only way to
lose weight.
16.Appeal to Force (argumentum ad baculum)
In the appeal to force, someone in a position of power threatens to bring down unfortunate
consequences upon anyone who dares to disagree with a proffered proposition.

Although it is rarely developed so explicitly, a fallacy of this type might propose:

•If you do not agree with my political opinions, you will receive a grade of F for this course.
•I believe that Herbert Hoover was the greatest President of the United States.
•Therefore, Herbert Hoover was the greatest President of the United States.

It should be clear that even if all of the premises were true, the conclusion could nevertheless
be false.
Since that is possible, arguments of this form are plainly invalid. While this might be an effective
way to get you to agree (or at least to pretend to agree) with my position, it offers no grounds
for believing it to be true.
 TYPE DESCRIPTION
•Ad To prime the audience with adverse information about the opponent from
Hominem the start, in an attempt to make your claim more acceptable, or discount the
credibility of your opponent's claim.

•Straw Man Attack a view similar to the one you wish to rebut. Divert attention away from
difficult issues by setting up easier issues that you may 'knock down'.

•Appeal to Using an opponent's inability to disprove a conclusion as proof of the

Ignorance conclusion's correctness.

•Red Herring Attempts to hide weakness by drawing attention away from the real issue.

•TuQuoque Claiming the argument is flawed by pointing out that the one making the
Fallacy argument is not acting consistently with the claims of the argument.
 TYPE DESCRIPTION
•The Causal The questionable cause— also known as causal fallacy, false cause, or non
Fallacy causapro causa("non-cause for cause" In Latin)—is a category of informal
fallacies in which a cause is incorrectly identified.

•Over Conclusions is not justified due to insufficient/biased evidence.(Hasty

Generalization Generalization)

•Loaded An unanswerable, biased question--sometimes only allowing two possible

Question answers (yes or no).

•Post Hoc, Ergo Arguing that because Event B occurred after Event A, Event A caused Event
Propter Hoc B.
(False
Causation)
 TYPE DESCRIPTION

•Ignoring the Avoiding countering an opposing argument directly by introducing a new or

Question non-issue to the argument.

•Appeal to
Authority/ Ad Assuming the authority of a figure establishes the truth of the argument.
Vericundiam

•False Basing an argument in a poor comparison of two things, ideas, events or

Analogy situations.

•Begging the Loading the conclusion in the claim; assuming that something is true before it
Question is proven.
 TYPE DESCRIPTION

•Appealing to Using historical preferences of the people (tradition), either in general or as

Tradition/ specific as the historical preferences of a single individual, as evidence that
Scholasticism the historical preference is correct.

•Bandwagon Belief that something should be done because the majority or people do it.
appeal

•Slippery The argument that one thing inevitably leads to another. A simplistic
Slope reduction of a possible chain of events.

•Circular It is a logical fallacy in which the reasoner begins with what they are trying to
Argument end with it.