Monday 2/24

Monday 2/24

Truth Phobic Language II

Readings

Notes

Synopsis

Today we rounded out our discussion of fallacious arguments by adding to our list of fallacies. Beginning with our initial list,

  • Genetic Fallacy
    • Abusive ad Hominem
    • Circumstantial ad Hominem
    • Tu Quoque (Appeal to Hypocrisy)
  • Appeal to (Inappropriate) Authority
  • Appeal to Pity
  • Appeal to Emotions
  • Appeal to the Masses
  • Appeal to Force
  • Complex Question
  • False Dilemma

we added,

  • Non Sequitor
  • Red Herring
  • Slippery Slope (Sorites)
  • Equivocation
  • Circular Argument (Petitio Principii, aka Begging the Question)
  • Fallacy of Accident
  • Hasty Generalization (Fallacy of Converse Accident)
  • Composition
  • False Cause (Post hoc ergo propter hoc)

We concluded today by considering specific examples from the handout, Informal Fallacy Problems. Note that I will select examples from these problems for the second examination, so it would be a good idea to work through them. What we discovered on analysis is that it is not always clear, when an argument commits a fallacy, precisely which fallacy is committed. There might even be more than one fallacy committed in a single passage! The upshot is that it can be a matter of further argument to determine when and in what way a fallacious move has been made in a given passage.

Hence, when I give these problems on the exam, I will either give you multiple choices, with one spot-on and the rest sufficiently far removed that if you know the fallacies, you can sort one from the other. Alternatively, I'll give you a short space to clearly justify why you think the passage is fallacious in the way you assert it is. I somewhat prefer the latter, since it gives you the greatest opportunity to weigh in by presenting your own arguments.