- 1. Making
- assumptions about a whole group or range of cases
- on a sample that is inadequate or with little evidence (usually because it is
- atypical or too small).
- Offering a
- solution or an explanation that is too simple for the problem or issue being
- argued. This fault overlooks the complexity of an issue.
- form of generalization or oversimplification in which an entire group is
- narrowly labeled or perceived on the basis of a few in the group.
- – falsely claiming that, because something resembles
- something else in one way, it resembles is in all ways.
- Drawing inferences or conclusions that do not follow
- logically from available evidence.
- – Attacking the character of the arguer rather than
- the argument itself.
Begging the Question
- complicated fallacy, an argument that begs the question asks the reader to
- simply accept the conclusion without providing real evidence.
- Partway through an argument, the arguer goes off on a
- tangent, raising a side issue that
- distracts the audience from what's really at stake. Often, the arguer never
- returns to the original issue.
Post Hoc (false cause)
Assuming that because B comes after A, A caused B.
Missing the Point
- - The premises of an argument do support a particular
- conclusion – but not
- the conclusion that the arguer actually draws.
- - The arguer claims that a sort of chain reaction,
- usually ending in some dire consequence,
- will take place, but there's really not enough evidence for that assumption
. Weak Analogy
- Many arguments rely on an analogy between two or more
- objects ideas, or situations. If the two things that are being compared aren't really
- alike in the relevant respects, the analogy is a weak one
Appeal to Authority
- Often, we
- add strength to our arguments by referring to respected sources or authorities
- & explaining their positions on issues we're discussing
Appeal to Pity
- It takes place when an arguer tries to get people to accept
- a conclusion by making them feel sorry for someone.
Appeal to Ignorance
- In this one, the arguer basically says, "Look,
- there's no conclusive evidence on the issue at hand. Therefore, you should
- accept my conclusion on this issue."
. Straw Man
- One way of making our own arguments stronger is to
- anticipate and respond in advance to the arguments that an opponent might
- make. The arguer sets up a wimpy version
- of the opponent’s position and tries to score point by knocking it down.
- – In this one, the arguer sets up situation so it
- looks like there are only two choices. The arguer then eliminates one of the
- choices, so it seems that we are left with only one option: the one the arguer
- wanted us to pick in the first place.
- Sliding between two or more different meanings of a
- single word or phrase that is important to the argument.