Spite Fallacy Examples

Shannon, my manager and family law paralegal is quite the character. We work at a law firm where fairness and justice is essential to running a high profile, sophisticated, … firm.

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

The three logical fallacies I chose to discuss are ad hominem, bandwagon, and stacking the deck. I chose these three based off examples I could think of that have been placed boldly in my face.

appealing to our audience. Patricia Roberts-Miller studied the principles of demagoguery and how they appeal to the public to make appropriate decisions. Patricia Roberts also state "that the most that information, the less likely the public will make appropriate decisions", with this information we can conclude how they can be used to appeal to the people. in different topics we use different demagoguery or fallacies to divide people into two different groups; the ingroup and outgroup. The ingroup is viewed as the good and correct group while the outgroup is viewed as wrong and bad. Demagoguery occurs mostly in times of political and economic crisis. In the speech of George Wallace on the topic of segregation and Donald Trump 's speech on the topic of immigration are perfect examples of the use of demagoguery. I will analyse the use of demagoguery and fallacies; such as grandstanding, demonising, nationalism, and hasty generalization, throughout their speeches to see how they appeal to the audience, I believe that the strategies use will show how the argument is inaccurate or how it relies on fear .

A politician will have enemies because of their different point of view on certain issue. Good politicians shake hands with their enemies and easily talk with them. LBJ once said, “Better to have ‘em inside the tent pissin’ out than outside pissin in.” During the time Lincoln was president he had an entire administration filled with people who were angry and all felt that they’d make a better president him. This is smart because once you have your enemies working with you they can’t bad mouth you and their interests collide with yours. Having enemies work for you makes people trust you, because it gives off the impression you’re open minded. Politician use ridicule in order to bring down their opponent, so it’s best if one come up with a quick witty remark because ignoring it is the worst possible thing one can do. It proves to people that the statement is true. Jimmy Carter ignored the “Keep you enemies in front of you” rule and paid for it dearly. Having defeated the Democratic establishment on his way to the Oval Office, carter soon found out that same establishment was rooting for

I have been faced with many situations that would be considered by the law a hate crime. Situations that I have been put in that nobody else need to be put in, not matter the gender race or religion. I have been put in a situation where my purpose of a visit to a high school in north Indiana was to speak to the students about Islam and how we can build bridges between the two cultures, the American and the Arab Muslim (or Muslim overall), and a young man by the name Chris told the teacher before I came and I quote, “If this guy comes here I’m calling the police, we don't need any damn terrorists up in here.” While most people would be mad, I was actually happy that that had happened, because I knew that this you man was not knowledgeable enough

On Thursday, October 20th, the 71st Annual Alfred E. Smith Memorial Foundation Dinner took place in New York. Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton took the stage, just like every other presidential candidate in the past, to entertain the audience with light humor. The purpose of this dinner is to raise money to help poor families in the Catholic Archdiocese of New York. This year, the dinner raised a record $6 million dollars, despite the behaviors of the candidates. This dinner is typically an opportunity for the candidates to show the country that they are only “temporary adversaries, not permanent enemies, and that leaders have shared values that help hold the system together” (Louis, 2016). Unfortunately, Trump and Clinton took this dinner as an opportunity to make malicious jabs at each other one more time.

This particular contrast is a good resemblance of people and society in general. We are forever bickering with people we claim to be our enemies. We like to decide whom to hate, but hate to pay for the aftermath if it isn't in our favor. When someone we declare our enemy crosses our path, it's natural to try and get a punch in. This gives some sense of satisfaction. Try to resist from this, you will benefit.

Donald Trump often time attack other politicians with his inaccurate evidences. He stupidly attacked President Obama on his birth certificate because one had to be born on American soil to become a president. At the end, the state of Hawaii released President Obama birth certificate proved that he is American, put an end to Trump’s birther movement (Nakaso). Another one from Trump’s attack was on Clinton’s emails while she was a secretary of State, even though nobody knows about the emails but he shouldn’t be pointing it out because it is her privacy and he said that she should be put in jail for them(Collison). Donald Trump’s attack connected deeply in the play The Crucible in a lot of way. When the judges demand John Proctor to sign his confession so they could nail it on the church said that Proctor is dealing with the devil, but Proctor signed it and ripped it apart because the confession was a lie. Proctor rather died than let a lie shattered his pride (Miller 1231). Proctor’s wife also accused for witchcraft because the doll found in her house. Abigail and Marry Warren set Elizabeth up so she would end up in jail

Hi Cecille, In answering your first question, the group I think out of the four examples we encounter daily in our lives would be "prejudiced discriminator." For example, "Isis" is a group who does not resent in stereotyping others. They do not hesitate sharing their prejudical beliefs with others and turning it into discriminatory behavior whenever they have the opportunity. In response to your second question, Yes, I believe the media is the main culprit to the way we preceive others. The reason for this, the media does not completely tell the truth and the information is filtered when sharing with the American people. For this reason, I believe the media is responsible for influencing people to be even more judgemental to being prejudical

Mudslinging is described as “the use of correct or incorrect insults or accusations against an opponent aiming to destroy their credibility or reputation.” Today, as seen in the election of 2016, mudslinging has become a huge part in the election process in voting for the President of the United States. Many people such as Donald Trump bashed Hillary Clinton into “the Mother of ISIS or a horrible lying United States Secretary of State,” because of her email and her Clinton Foundation. On the contrary, Hillary breaks down on Donald Trump to being “the lying, racist, businessman he really is,” because of his companies issues of fake bankruptcy and tax evasions. This can also go to show that mudslinging is not always have to be harsh, but it can swade someone’s vote which causes them to look at the other candidate as “bad” because of the reputation that the other candidate has “set up in flames.”

The Appeal to Spite Fallacy is a fallacy in which spite is substituted for evidence when an “argument” is made against a claim. . . . This sort of “reasoning” is fallacious because a feeling of spite does not count as evidence for or against a claim. (The Nizkor Project, 2012)

“Dirty tricks”- An unfair attack on a political rival meant to make them look bad.

Most career politicians have mastered the red herring technique, that is to say; they appeal to emotion of a receiver in order to distract from a main issue and in turn manipulate sentiment into order to persuade the outcome of a topic without providing factual evidence.

Fallacy: Guilt by association, Fallacious appeal to authority Explantation: The juror uses put down words, to put own the kid because they all know what he is, and because of that, they are natural born liars. It is also fallacious appeal to authority because they are accepting his authority or expertise because he has lived among them his whole life. Living with them his whole life has made him an expert in knowing that these kind of people are liars.