Logical Fallacy Examples

In Mrs.Smith's English class we had a political ad project. We learned about all the logical fallacies like logos, pathos, and ethos. We also watched political ads. It first started with a plate form we all had to right one. Then we had the option to be with a partner or to go solo and we could combine our plate form. Once we had combined them we had to write our script using it. Trying to fit 7 rhetorical elements, such as ethos, pathos, and everyman. Once we had our script written we had to film our candidate. We had about 3 weeks to complete the project which was plenty of time it just sneaks up kinda fast.

A fallacy is defined as a kind of error in reasoning. They can be persuasive and be created both unintentionally and intentionally in order to deceive others from the truth. Fallacies often indicate a false belief or cause of a false belief (dowden, 2006). An argument or situation commits a fallacy when the reasons offered do not support the conclusion. This defeats the purpose of the argument since its point is to give reason to support the conclusion. Fallacies affect the outcome of our everyday decision making process. There are three types of logical fallacies discussed in this paper along with the importance of utilizing critical thinking skills.

The one that sticks out personally to me is Appeal to Authority, Ancient Wisdom, and Red Herring. Appeal to Authority consist of giving credibility based on a degree and schooling. For instance, someone in a white such as a doctor; people will assume since they are educated they know what they are talking about but they are not always right. Ancient Wisdom is a big NO! there is no way that ancient had a better understand or the tools compared to today’s science. Red Herring is the distraction from logical evidence such as conspiracy theories. Red Herring tends to distract people from an actual important topic.

of the most common fallacies, named Bandwagon, is usually seen in a lot of stories. Bandwagon

An argument is an effective strategy used to persuade individuals or public that a general opinion or perception is either right or wrong. Although, as we try to create a reasonable argument, chances are we encounter logical fallacies. A fallacy is a faulty line in reasoning that hinder our ability to make an argument invalid, affecting our ability to argue effectively. Fallacies are more commonly used as a tool to influence opinion or actions of individuals or group of individuals to as to obtain a future goal while obscuring the truth of the matter. These are more commonly referred to as propagandas, which persuades the public to be “for” or “against” certain political ideas, religion, races and opinions as a whole. A propagandist wants invoke

| Demonstrates solid understanding of the concept of reasoning fallacies and identifies the most important fallacies in the argument by name and discusses their

Schmidt’s article, On Classifications of Fallacies including the author’s own classification system. Although they all attempted to classify the complicated Logical Fallacies, most of the philosophers presented in On Classifications of Fallacies agreed that there was no definite way to classify Logical Fallacies. The classification of Logical Fallacies was first tackled in 350 B.C., by Greek philosopher Aristotle, and continues to be tackled, as philosophers search for a better way to define them. In general Logical Fallacies are defined by where the logic goes wrong, however one philosopher, Ronald Munson, attempted to classify them according to what type of argument they “support” (Schmidt). No matter the way the classification system is drawn there is always Fallacies that crossover into multiple categories. Any classification system that eliminates crossovers is too complex to fulfil the purpose of a classifying, which is to simplify. The classifications found in Schmidt’s article On Classifications of Fallacies, attempt to create formal classification systems, however in our pursuit of understanding Logical Fallacies a simple working classification will do fine.

A fallacy occurs in an argument when the premises do not provide the necessary support to derive the conclusion. Three common types of fallacies are fallacies of vagueness, fallacies of ambiguity, and fallacies of equivocation. In fallacies of vagueness, such as slippery slope fallacies, occur when the argument exploits borderline cases caused by vague language. Fallacies of ambiguity occurs when a word or phrase with multiple definitions is used within an argument. Arguments with fallacies of relevance occur when the premises persuade through emotion rather than logic.

In the referenced article, another fallacy used by the author is attacking the person and not the argument (Paul & Elder 2008). He points out that the President is too focused on pleasing both sides, Democratic and Republican, that he is forgetting about the main issue at hand: the state of the nation

The use of logical fallacies is directly connected to the “Idol of the Cave,” where the individual believe in false notion based off their background and relationships amongst one another. Indirectly stating how individuals’ personal understanding was influenced by others and criticizing, exemplifies how he had the ability to agree with the ideal of the “Idols of the Cave” through this understanding of how influential of

After learning about the logical fallacies, I began to notice that people use them quite a lot. This weekend I tried being on the lookout for when someone used them, but now that I reflect back I realize that I have used some too. I realized that I used the post hoc, ergom pro pter hoc, and that people around me used the appeal to tradition.

I enjoyed the fallacy Jeopardy game a lot; I think is a great tool to get us ready for the quiz we must take this week. I planned to play it again since I missed a few of them. A lot of these names are completely new to me, I must continue to read and study the names and their definitions in order to be able to identify them by just reading the names. When I read the fallacy Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc, I honestly thought I was reading a completely different

The dubious authority fallacy would be when someone uses a replacement opinion from someone who is not a subject matter expert. My wife and I both use Google to figure out everything, and I feel like that would be an example of this. Today our society is spoiled by technology, and it has its advantages, but also its disadvantages. I feel that one of the disadvantages is the amount information that is available and unreliable information. All that information is also an advantage, because we don’t need to visit library or any other reliable information is all at the click of a mouse. We have all the information generations before us would have never known. Many of us rely on Google for our everyday questions, and I guess with proper research

c. Errors in logic, or fallacies, can make an argument appear weak and unconvincing. Read about good arguments versus fallacies, and complete the five exercises. Then write two syllogisms of your own that are based on fallacies, and explain their logical errors. You might choose from these fallacies: validity problem, post hoc, slippery slope, straw man, inconsistency, begging the question, false dilemma, non sequitur, and ad hominem.

An example of a fallacy I am accountable of employing is argumentum ad hominem. In the past, I’ve been in disagreements with colleagues that have led to insults. That’s to say, that I have insulted colleagues by dismissing and bringing them down because of their education credentials. Yes, I am not pleased of engaging in such behavior, but throughout that instant one doesn’t contemplate before communicating. One time, a friend and I were conversing on geographical locations and our dispute escalated into an insult. My purpose was to verify I was correct and he was incorrect, but I stated he knew very minimal given that he had not completed high school. Indeed, I was attacking his character based on his life decisions.