|
| 06 Oct 2014 11:13 PM |
Hopefully this will help make your arguments stronger. I'd suggest reading all of it.
Below, I'm going to list the classifications of informal fallacies.
First, what is an informal fallacy? An informal fallacy is an argument whose stated premises fail to support its proposed conclusion. Basically, a weak argument.
Before you continue reading, understand that an argument can be classified under multiple fallacies, and often they will be.
How do we classify these informal fallacies so we can understand them, avoid them, and point out when someone commits one? There are two broad categories that each contain specific fallacies - Fallacies of Relevance, and Fallacies of Presumption. Fallacies of relevance tend to be more straightforward and easier to detect, while fallacies of presumption are more common and harder to detect.
Fallacies of Relevance: - Ad Ignorantiam: an argument formed from ignorance. Simply, not enough information to support the claim. - Ad Verecundiam: an argument that appeals to an irrelevant authority. For example, this celebrity says to use this toothpaste, so you should. The celebrity is an irrelevant authority - a relevant authority would be a dentist. - Ad Hominem: an argument that attack's a person's character or circumstances. This is commonly used in court cases, where a prosecutor or defender will question a witness' credibility based on their criminal record. - Ad Populum: an argument based upon what most or all people think; bandwagon. For example, a deodorant company may make a commercial saying that everyone uses their product, so you should too. - Ad Misericordiam: an argument concerning the appeal to pity or a related emotion to gain the acceptance of a conclusion. Those ASPCA commercials are perfect examples (you'll find that 99% of commercials are centered on an informal fallacy). - Ad Baculum: an argument based on the appeal to force or threats in order to bring about the acceptance of a conclusion. Basically the opposite of Ad Misericordiam. "I'm right, because if you disagree, I'll kick your ass." - Ignoratio Elenchi: a fallacy involving an irrelevant conclusion. "The sky is blue so I should run for president."
Fallacies of Presumption: - Complex Question: a fallacy of asking a question that assumes conclusions that are not frequently asked; a loaded question. You know that old joke, "Do your parents know you're not straight?"? Yeah, that's a complex question fallacy. These can be very subtle, like "What church does your family attend?," which assumes that your family goes to church, and even the fact that you have a family. They can be harmless, but are common fallacies. - False Cause: a fallacy of ascribing a casual relationship to two unrelated events. This is different from Ignoratio Elenchi. It is stating that because an event preceded another event, it caused it. For example, "Obama was elected president, so the US is still in debt." - Petitio Principii: an argument in which the conclusion restates the premise; circular reasoning. This is exactly what is sounds like. "Roblox is a website. Therefore, Roblox is a website." - Accident: a fallacy in deductive reasoning; the misapplication of a generality to a specific example. This one can be a bit confusing. An example would be "You can't ABSOLUTELY trust somebody, because you can't trust them to give you brain surgery." The fallacy is that the term 'absolute' is being taken out of context based on the situation. It is unrealistic to expect someone with no experience to give you brain surgery, as it is also unrealistic to assume that denying brain surgery from an inexperienced friend is an issue in trust. This fallacy lies in the misinterpretation of terms when applied to specific situations. - Converse Accident: a fallacy of inductive reasoning; using one or a few specific examples to make a general statement. The opposite of Accident. "Because this one man cut his arm off and ate it for fun, all men eat their own arms." (Obviously that's an extreme example).
Props to you if you read and interpreted all of this. Hopefully your arguments and counterarguments will hold more weight now. Even though your arguments still won't get anywhere against some of these stubborn 12 y/os.
|
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
Vulnerite
|
  |
| Joined: 05 Nov 2007 |
| Total Posts: 11492 |
|
|
| 06 Oct 2014 11:15 PM |
| the logical flaw of false statistics was found in the OP |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 06 Oct 2014 11:15 PM |
| Vulnerite's argument is a fallacy of Ad Ignorantiam. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
Vulnerite
|
  |
| Joined: 05 Nov 2007 |
| Total Posts: 11492 |
|
|
| 06 Oct 2014 11:18 PM |
"you'll find about 99%"
PROOF CADET |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 06 Oct 2014 11:20 PM |
@Vulnerite Link me a commercial from YT. Any commercial. I'll prove it. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
Vulnerite
|
  |
| Joined: 05 Nov 2007 |
| Total Posts: 11492 |
|
|
| 06 Oct 2014 11:21 PM |
dont need to cadet
the thing is that you used a statistic which is not real hence a logical fallacy
have you a database of all those commercials and looked for said logical fallacy in ALL of them to get the number 99%? no?
Ha Ha Ha
|
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 06 Oct 2014 11:24 PM |
Good job. It is a fallacy. Not one of any relevance or importance, so it holds no weight that you pointed it out, but it's a fallacy nonetheless.
Bonus round: What fallacy is it? |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 06 Oct 2014 11:29 PM |
This post probably went over everyone's head.
Forever forced to listen to autistic arguments. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 06 Oct 2014 11:40 PM |
bump someone join in my intellectual studies |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
Glerax
|
  |
| Joined: 13 Feb 2012 |
| Total Posts: 16552 |
|
|
| 06 Oct 2014 11:42 PM |
Interesting, I'll track this.
A lot of these are used on C&G way too much.
FC's prophet - Hail Gleraxia ᕦ(ò_óˇ)ᕤ ~ Join my primary while the filter isn't put up. Limited time offer! |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
ChoongJae
|
  |
| Joined: 10 Oct 2009 |
| Total Posts: 670 |
|
| |
|
| |
|
Glerax
|
  |
| Joined: 13 Feb 2012 |
| Total Posts: 16552 |
|
|
| 06 Oct 2014 11:46 PM |
I've seen some scattered, but this kind of keeps them all consolidated onto one thread. Its pretty useful, although C&G'ers that a lot of these apply to will probably just give me an ad hominem or ad ignorantiam reply.
FC's prophet - Hail Gleraxia ᕦ(ò_óˇ)ᕤ ~ Join my primary while the filter isn't put up. Limited time offer! |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 06 Oct 2014 11:50 PM |
| Indeed, Glerax. That's an issue with understand fallacies. It's only especially useful when all parties involves understand and agree to these fallacies. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 06 Oct 2014 11:52 PM |
tl;dr
i already have the yourlogicalfallacyis site bookmarked anyways |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
| |
|
Doccc
|
  |
| Joined: 15 Sep 2013 |
| Total Posts: 3370 |
|
|
| 07 Oct 2014 03:47 PM |
| Yay, an English lesson for C&G. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 07 Oct 2014 03:59 PM |
| Not much of an English lesson as much as a lesson in not posing irrelevant arguments. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|