Some of the logical fallacies that I learned about this week are slippery slope, begging the question, and circular reasoning.
Slippery slope is when a chain of effects happens as a result of a small first step. For example, if someone goes to the shooting range they will become a serial killer. For a slippery slope argument there is no middle ground and there is only one event that can happen as a result of another. If A then B, rather than if A then B or C or D.
Begging the question is when a claim asserts that an event has taken place. For example when the question is asked: "Are humans still evolving?" It asserts that humans evolved in the past which is not a proven fact.
Circular reasoning is when two or moreclaims require eachother to be true. For example I am part of the human race because the human race is made up of humans. The statement I am a human requires me to be part of the human race. The human race requires humans to exist.
Post hoc ergo propter hoc fallacy is when the author uses a very unrealistic cause and effect situation to support their argument. For example, in a commercial someone may get this fancy new laptop, which "causes" them to be the most productive in the work place.
Cum hoc ergo propter hoc fallacy is bit different than the first because this creates a situation in which two unrelated events happen at the same time, and are therefor related. To use the previous example, someone may get the fancy new laptop, then he or she gets promoted, suggesting the laptop will boost your productivity and get you noticed by your superiors.
Stacking the evidence is exactly what it sounds like. It's when an argument only uses large amounts of evidence that supports itself. For example if I was interviewing for a new job, I would stack the evidence by saying all the things about me that are good, while saying none of the bad things.
One of the logical fallacies I learned about was slippery slope. Slippery slope is when you make a conclusion that is based on just a single incidence or conclusion rather than something that is thought through and given all sides of the story to figure out what the argument is.
For instance, in class I had that time where it was asked by the professor "Do you like vacation? WHO DOESN'T LIKE VACATION??!?!!?" and I said I didn't. I got into a rhetorical argument over what is considered a vacation and what is my own enjoyment. The slippery slop of the argument was by saying that just because I am in South Carolina and at Clemson that it is considered a vacation, and then I qualified and countered with what I consider to be a vacation. The slippery slope was the conclusion just based on a single instance of something.
One of the logical fallacies this weekend is called straw man. Basically, straw man is arguing a point that nobody is defending. This fallacy relies on the audience either not noticing or being uninformed.
One of the examples used in the video was that if someone were to make the claim the education system in the United States is flawed and needs to be corrected. The person arguing the claim with the straw man tactic might counter that with, "So, you don't think education is important?" This is a much more broad idea that can be easily argued. However, this argument is directed at a claim that was never stated.
A logical fallacy is an error in one's reasoning that makes an argument invalid. In Homer's Iliad, Odysseus makes the "ad hominem" fallacy: "You are the worst of men; therefore, what you say is false."So, Odysseus makes the man he is talking to invalid by stating his invalidity. The man's invalidity is the fact that he is the "worst of men" according to Odysseus. Whatever this man says to Odysseus (or anyone in his eyes) is false based off of his opinion towards the man.
One of the fallacies I learned about is the bandwagon. This fallacy uses an explanation based on the assumption that everyone already knows or is doing what you are saying. Another fallacy I learned about was Ad Hominim. Its attacking the speaker and devaluing their views because of some random reason against them. Red herring is a fallacy that is used to distract the reader from what is actually being said. You speak about what your topic is on, but then throw something unrelated in.
Some of the logical fallacies that I learned about were ad hominem and faulty cause and effect.
Ad hominem means against the man, which explains why this fallacy is when a person is being attacked instead of an issue. An example of this fallacy is "We can not listen to Bob's opinion on funny pictures because he does not even like dank memes."
Faulty cause and effect is the belief that when one event happens after another, then the first event caused the second event. An example of this fallacy is "Whenever I wash my shoes, they always get very dirty the next day. Therefore, washing my shoes causes dirt to appear everywhere I walk."
I learned about the strawman argument. The strawman argument is a logical fallacy where a person intentionally changes the representation of a certain argument so that they can make an easy common sense counter argument. An example would be if two people were arguing about if they like a rock music or not. One person could set up a strawman how the other doesn't appreciate the history behind music and accuses them of believing that rock music causes people to become "bad."
The no true scotsman fallacy implies that a group must conform to exact principles to be a part of that certain group. An example would be if someone says that another is not a "true" Christian because they don't appear at church every week.
Begging the question is a fallacy where one person makes a claim while asking a question. An example would be "How many aliens live among us?". The person asking the question asserts that aliens exist and already are here while asking a question on what magnitude is his claim correct.
One of the logical fallacies we learned about was the real Scotsman. This is when someone claims in order to be a real member of the group someone must fit a certain criteria. Usually doing or not doing something.
For example. Someone might claim "Christians go to church every Sunday" . I might then declare that I am a Christian and I do not make it to church. Then that person might reply " yeah, but you aren't a real Christian are you"? Just because I do not always make it to church does not make me less of a Christian than someone else. Even so, since Church is associated with Christianity, one might therefore conclude that only real Christians attend church every Sunday.
One of the logical fallacies I learned about this weekend was the argument from authority. The meaning of it is that an argument is concluded as true because an expert has stated that and it must be true. What can happen from that point on is that people could assume the expert is correct and creating a fallacy. If the research was done wrong and the it isn't credible than that must not be that believable, but because it comes from experts the majority of people would tend to believe it.
This weekend I learned about several logical fallacies. A logical fallacy is something in a person’s argument that hurts their case, and weakens their argument. The logical fallacy I can relate to the most is called slippery slope. The slippery slope is when you are arguing with someone, or even just in a non-heated debate, and you tend to "slide" down a path of unreasonable logic. When on the slippery slope, one tends to zone in on their own thoughts and block out what the other person is talking about. They become too focused on their own thoughts and cannot stop themselves to open up to outside opinions. By doing this, the weak argument keeps getting weaken and cannot stop itself from doing so.
One of the logical fallacies that I saw this weekend is Slippery slope. Which is when a chain effect happens all from one small consequence that you didn't see coming.
For example, if I decided to skip class on Friday because I did not feel like it. At first I might not see the problem in this but if there was a pop quiz or assignment do that day I don't get credit because i wasn't there. Plus we might have learned something in class that the teacher might not be willing to work with me after because I wasn't there. And on top of that, if you need that absents down the road then you would of put yourself in a tough spot.
Some of the logical fallacies that I learned about this week are slippery slope, begging the question, and circular reasoning.
ReplyDeleteSlippery slope is when a chain of effects happens as a result of a small first step. For example, if someone goes to the shooting range they will become a serial killer. For a slippery slope argument there is no middle ground and there is only one event that can happen as a result of another. If A then B, rather than if A then B or C or D.
Begging the question is when a claim asserts that an event has taken place. For example when the question is asked: "Are humans still evolving?" It asserts that humans evolved in the past which is not a proven fact.
Circular reasoning is when two or moreclaims require eachother to be true. For example I am part of the human race because the human race is made up of humans. The statement I am a human requires me to be part of the human race. The human race requires humans to exist.
Post hoc ergo propter hoc fallacy is when the author uses a very unrealistic cause and effect situation to support their argument. For example, in a commercial someone may get this fancy new laptop, which "causes" them to be the most productive in the work place.
ReplyDeleteCum hoc ergo propter hoc fallacy is bit different than the first because this creates a situation in which two unrelated events happen at the same time, and are therefor related. To use the previous example, someone may get the fancy new laptop, then he or she gets promoted, suggesting the laptop will boost your productivity and get you noticed by your superiors.
Stacking the evidence is exactly what it sounds like. It's when an argument only uses large amounts of evidence that supports itself. For example if I was interviewing for a new job, I would stack the evidence by saying all the things about me that are good, while saying none of the bad things.
One of the logical fallacies I learned about was slippery slope. Slippery slope is when you make a conclusion that is based on just a single incidence or conclusion rather than something that is thought through and given all sides of the story to figure out what the argument is.
ReplyDeleteFor instance, in class I had that time where it was asked by the professor "Do you like vacation? WHO DOESN'T LIKE VACATION??!?!!?" and I said I didn't. I got into a rhetorical argument over what is considered a vacation and what is my own enjoyment. The slippery slop of the argument was by saying that just because I am in South Carolina and at Clemson that it is considered a vacation, and then I qualified and countered with what I consider to be a vacation. The slippery slope was the conclusion just based on a single instance of something.
One of the logical fallacies this weekend is called straw man. Basically, straw man is arguing a point that nobody is defending. This fallacy relies on the audience either not noticing or being uninformed.
ReplyDeleteOne of the examples used in the video was that if someone were to make the claim the education system in the United States is flawed and needs to be corrected. The person arguing the claim with the straw man tactic might counter that with, "So, you don't think education is important?" This is a much more broad idea that can be easily argued. However, this argument is directed at a claim that was never stated.
A logical fallacy is an error in one's reasoning that makes an argument invalid. In Homer's Iliad, Odysseus makes the "ad hominem" fallacy: "You are the worst of men; therefore, what you say is false."So, Odysseus makes the man he is talking to invalid by stating his invalidity. The man's invalidity is the fact that he is the "worst of men" according to Odysseus. Whatever this man says to Odysseus (or anyone in his eyes) is false based off of his opinion towards the man.
ReplyDeleteOne of the fallacies I learned about is the bandwagon. This fallacy uses an explanation based on the assumption that everyone already knows or is doing what you are saying. Another fallacy I learned about was Ad Hominim. Its attacking the speaker and devaluing their views because of some random reason against them. Red herring is a fallacy that is used to distract the reader from what is actually being said. You speak about what your topic is on, but then throw something unrelated in.
ReplyDeleteSome of the logical fallacies that I learned about were ad hominem and faulty cause and effect.
ReplyDeleteAd hominem means against the man, which explains why this fallacy is when a person is being attacked instead of an issue. An example of this fallacy is "We can not listen to Bob's opinion on funny pictures because he does not even like dank memes."
Faulty cause and effect is the belief that when one event happens after another, then the first event caused the second event. An example of this fallacy is "Whenever I wash my shoes, they always get very dirty the next day. Therefore, washing my shoes causes dirt to appear everywhere I walk."
I learned about the strawman argument. The strawman argument is a logical fallacy where a person intentionally changes the representation of a certain argument so that they can make an easy common sense counter argument. An example would be if two people were arguing about if they like a rock music or not. One person could set up a strawman how the other doesn't appreciate the history behind music and accuses them of believing that rock music causes people to become "bad."
ReplyDeleteThe no true scotsman fallacy implies that a group must conform to exact principles to be a part of that certain group. An example would be if someone says that another is not a "true" Christian because they don't appear at church every week.
Begging the question is a fallacy where one person makes a claim while asking a question. An example would be "How many aliens live among us?". The person asking the question asserts that aliens exist and already are here while asking a question on what magnitude is his claim correct.
One of the logical fallacies we learned about was the real Scotsman. This is when someone claims in order to be a real member of the group someone must fit a certain criteria. Usually doing or not doing something.
ReplyDeleteFor example. Someone might claim "Christians go to church every Sunday" . I might then declare that I am a Christian and I do not make it to church. Then that person might reply " yeah, but you aren't a real Christian are you"? Just because I do not always make it to church does not make me less of a Christian than someone else. Even so, since Church is associated with Christianity, one might therefore conclude that only real Christians attend church every Sunday.
One of the logical fallacies I learned about this weekend was the argument from authority. The meaning of it is that an argument is concluded as true because an expert has stated that and it must be true. What can happen from that point on is that people could assume the expert is correct and creating a fallacy. If the research was done wrong and the it isn't credible than that must not be that believable, but because it comes from experts the majority of people would tend to believe it.
ReplyDeleteOne of the logical fallacies I learned about this weekend was circular reasoning. Circular reasoning is when keep the argument going in a circle.
ReplyDeleteThis weekend I learned about several logical fallacies. A logical fallacy is something in a person’s argument that hurts their case, and weakens their argument. The logical fallacy I can relate to the most is called slippery slope. The slippery slope is when you are arguing with someone, or even just in a non-heated debate, and you tend to "slide" down a path of unreasonable logic. When on the slippery slope, one tends to zone in on their own thoughts and block out what the other person is talking about. They become too focused on their own thoughts and cannot stop themselves to open up to outside opinions. By doing this, the weak argument keeps getting weaken and cannot stop itself from doing so.
ReplyDeleteOne of the logical fallacies that I saw this weekend is Slippery slope. Which is when a chain effect happens all from one small consequence that you didn't see coming.
ReplyDeleteFor example, if I decided to skip class on Friday because I did not feel like it. At first I might not see the problem in this but if there was a pop quiz or assignment do that day I don't get credit because i wasn't there. Plus we might have learned something in class that the teacher might not be willing to work with me after because I wasn't there. And on top of that, if you need that absents down the road then you would of put yourself in a tough spot.