Scribd
Upload
28 views3 pages

Logical_Fallacies_Class_Handout

The document outlines common logical fallacies, such as Ad Hominem, Straw Man, and Circular Reasoning, providing definitions, examples, and explanations for each. It emphasizes the importance of recognizing these fallacies to strengthen reasoning and avoid misleading arguments. Additionally, it highlights the benefits of improving critical thinking and communication skills by avoiding logical fallacies.

Uploaded by

Lauren Maria Elsom
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
28 views3 pages

Logical_Fallacies_Class_Handout

The document outlines common logical fallacies, such as Ad Hominem, Straw Man, and Circular Reasoning, providing definitions, examples, and explanations for each. It emphasizes the importance of recognizing these fallacies to strengthen reasoning and avoid misleading arguments. Additionally, it highlights the benefits of improving critical thinking and communication skills by avoiding logical fallacies.

Uploaded by

Lauren Maria Elsom
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 3

Understanding Logical Fallacies

Objective: To identify and understand common logical fallacies, recognize them in


arguments, and understand why avoiding them leads to stronger, more credible reasoning.

Ad Hominem
Definition: Attacks the person making the argument instead of addressing the argument
itself.

Example: You can’t trust her opinion on climate change because she’s not even a scientist.

Explanation: This distracts from the argument’s actual merits by attacking the person's
background rather than their ideas. Arguments should be judged on their evidence and
logic, not the person making them.

Straw Man
Definition: Misrepresents or exaggerates an opponent’s argument to make it easier to
attack.

Example: He wants to cut the defense budget, so he must think our country should be
defenseless.

Explanation: This tactic sidesteps the actual argument and attributes a more extreme view
to the opponent. Effective discussions rely on accurately representing opposing viewpoints.

Appeal to Authority
Definition: Claims something is true because an authority figure believes it, regardless of the
authority's relevance to the topic.

Example: A famous actor says this supplement works, so it must be effective.

Explanation: While experts can provide valuable insights, simply relying on authority
figures without relevant expertise can lead to unsupported conclusions. Independent
verification is crucial for credibility.
Slippery Slope
Definition: Claims that a particular action will trigger a chain of negative events without
evidence for the inevitable progression.

Example: If we allow students to redo one assignment, soon they’ll expect to redo every test
and project!

Explanation: This fallacy exaggerates consequences without proof. Avoiding it helps in


assessing situations based on realistic possibilities rather than extreme, unlikely outcomes.

False Dilemma (False Dichotomy)


Definition: Presents two options as the only possible choices, ignoring other alternatives.

Example: You’re either with us, or you’re against us.

Explanation: This oversimplifies complex issues, limiting discussion. Recognizing it


encourages consideration of a broader range of choices and perspectives.

Circular Reasoning
Definition: The conclusion is used as a premise to support itself, creating a loop with no
independent support.

Example: Reading improves intelligence because intelligent people read.

Explanation: Circular arguments lack supporting evidence outside of their own statements.
Identifying circular reasoning is essential for validating whether arguments have genuine
support.

Hasty Generalization
Definition: Draws a broad conclusion based on a small or unrepresentative sample.

Example: My friend got into a car accident after texting, so texting while driving must
always lead to accidents.

Explanation: Generalizations based on limited examples can lead to stereotypes or


inaccurate conclusions. Strong arguments rely on sufficient and representative evidence.
Red Herring
Definition: Introduces an irrelevant topic to distract from the main issue.

Example: Why worry about recycling? There are people suffering from poverty all over the
world!

Explanation: This tactic diverts attention from the actual topic at hand. Identifying red
herrings helps maintain focus on relevant issues.

Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc (False Cause)


Definition: Assumes that because one event follows another, the first event caused the
second.

Example: I started using this app, and now my grades have improved. The app must be why.

Explanation: Correlation does not necessarily imply causation. Understanding this fallacy
helps distinguish between related events and actual cause-effect relationships.

Bandwagon Appeal
Definition: Claims something is true or good because it is popular.

Example: Everyone else is buying this brand of shoes, so they must be the best.

Explanation: Popular opinion isn’t always right or rational. Recognizing the bandwagon
appeal encourages independent thought and critical evaluation.

Why Logical Fallacies Matter


Logical fallacies are often persuasive but weaken arguments and can mislead audiences. By
identifying and avoiding them, we can:
- Improve our critical thinking skills.
- Strengthen our communication and argumentation.
- Protect ourselves from manipulation in media, advertising, and debate.

Use this handout as a reference to identify fallacies in arguments you encounter, and strive
to build logical, evidence-based arguments in your own writing and discussions.

You might also like