Fallacies

A fallacy is a deceptive argument which appears valid but is not.

The word comes from the latin “fallo” which means “I deceive.”

Importance of Studying Fallacies

Correct methods of inference are better appreciated
by contrasting them with erroneous ones.

Ability to think correctly includes the ability to detect

and avoid incorrect reasoning.

It helps prevent confusion and aids us in decision

making.
Categories of Fallacies
• Fallacies of Ambiguity
• Fallacies of Relevance

The fallacies of ambiguity (or

fallacies of language) are
those arguments that contain
ambiguous words or phrases
whose meanings shift and
change within the course of
the argument.
Categories of Fallacies
The fallacies of relevance are
those arguments whose
premises are not relevant to the
conclusion and therefore cannot
possibly establish truth.

However, the premises are often

psychologically relevant to the
conclusion which explains their
seeming correctness and
persuasiveness.
AMPHIBOLY - using a
phrase whose meaning
is ambiguous because
the grammatical
construction can be
interpreted in various
ways.
Examples:
• If Creosus wages war
against the Persians, He
will destroy a mighty
kingdom.
• To be repaired: the
rocking chair of an old
lady with broken legs.
• Going up the stage, the
crowd applauded the
newly elected Prsident.
 Fallacies of Ambiguity
• ACCENT – Using ambiguously a
word/phrase that has different meanings
when accented differently.

Examples:
We should not speak ill of
our friends.

Midnight SALE 50% discount

Fallacies of Ambiguity
• EQUIVOCATION – Using
the different
senses/meanings of a term
in a single line of reasoning.
• Examples:
What is natural is good
To err is natural
Therefore, to err is good
 Fallacies of Ambiguity
• FIGURES OF SPEECH – consists of inferring a
meaning based on the similarity of word
structure
Examples:
Anybody restless is not restful
To be careless is not careful
What is immaterial is not material

Stevenson is a ghost writer

but a ghost is a spirit
Therefore, Stevenson is a spirit.
 Fallacies of Ambiguity
• VICIOUS ABSTRACTION – altering
the logic or meaning of a statement
by using vague or abstract terms.

Examples:

Vote Crisaldo – The People’s Choice

Coke is the Real Thing

“The currency crisis will not have much effect

anymore on the prices of goods; in fact there will
be no price increases for the meantime.
Fallacies of Relevance
• ARGUMENTUM AD HOMINEM
(Personal Attack)
• Abusive – ignoring the issue by
attacking the character or personality of
the opponent
Example:
Those who are in favor of death penalty
want vengeance pure and simple
 Fallacies of Relevance
• Circumstantial – ignoring the issue by citing
the circumstances of another person (Is also
called “tu quoque” which means “you’re
another)

Example:
Mark Gil: Why were you late again in
our class Mark Josep?
Mark Joseph: Look who’s talking. How
about you? You’re always late in our
class.
Fallacies of Relevance
• ARGUMENTUM AD
POPULUM (Appeal to the
interests and passions of the
people)

Example/s:
Advertisements which
associate certain products
with things of which we are
expected to approve strongly,
or excite us favorably.
Fallacies of Relevance

• ARGUMENTUM AD MISERICORDIAM
(Appeal to Pity)

This student should be given a passing

mark.
You see he is troubled by serious family
problems at present. His family can’t
afford to pay his tuition. It’s the OFMs
who pay for his tuition. If he fails, he
might not be supported anymore.
 Fallacies of Relevance
• ARGUMENTUM AD INVIDIAM (Appeal
to Anger)

I want him to face death

penalty because he raped and
brutally killed my wife. People
like him should have no place
in a civilized society like ours.
Argumentum Ad Baculum
(Appeal to Force)

Try voicing a contrary

opinion next meeting
and I will make sure
you never get a decent
job in town.
.
 Argumentum Ad Verecundiam
(Appeal to inappropriate authority)

Examples:

Advertisements that urge people to

buy certain products.

The doctrine of biological evolution

cannot be true, for it contradicts the
biblical account of creation, the church
Fathers never accepted it and the
Fundamentalists explicitly condemn it.
Argumentum Ad Iudicium (Appeal to
Judgment)
Assumes that conclusion is proven
true because people in general believe it to
be true. This is also appeal to customs or
tradition.

There is nothing wrong with

Kaingin. Our forefathers have
practiced it since time
immemorial. Do you mean to tell
me that they were wrong all the
while?
Our exams should be
postponed, Sir! The majority
of the class have agreed to it.

She is surely the best

qualified for the position of
mayor. She received more
votes than any other mayor.
ACCIDENT – Unnecessarily applying a
general truth to particular cases. This
fallacy assumes that what is true in
general is true in particular.

PNP is one of the most corrupt

agencies of the government. Therefore,
the “Euro generals” cannot be trusted.”

San Miguel is a very talented team.

Samigue Eman, being a member of that
Team must be a very talented player.
CONVERSE ACCIDENT (Hasty
Generalization)
– drawing a general or universal conclusion
from insufficient particular cases. This
fallacy
assumes that what is true in particular is
true in general.
Because every part of the
machine is light in weight,
therefore the whole machine is
light in weight.
Singapore, Japan and Great
Britain adopted a parliamentary
form of government and
became politically and
economically stable. Therefore,
any country that adopts a
parliamentary government will
be
politically and economically
stable.
Argumentum Ad Ignorantiam (Appeal to
Ignorance)
- assuming that the conclusion is true
because its opposite cannot be proven.
I believe there are living creatures
in Mars called Martians.
Nobody can furnish evidence to
disprove my contention,
So it must be true.

Ghost cannot kill you cannot prove

they do.
FALSE CAUSE (Post Hoc Ergo Propter
Hoc)
•“after this, therefore because of this”
•mistaking a purely temporal
sequence for a causal relationship.

After he broke the bedroom mirror,

bad luck attended his
business ventures. I am convinced
that breaking a mirror is bad luck.
COMPLEX QUESTION – Asking a
question in which some presuppositions
are buried in that question

Have you already stopped

gambling?

Why did the government allow

the peso to depreciate so much?
STRAW MAN – Attacking a position
that is different from, but similar
to, an opponent’s real position, and
concludes that the opponent’s real
position has thereby been refuted.
The opponent being attacked
however is not the real opponent
but an unreal opponent, a straw
man who has been constructed by
the attacker solely for the purpose
of destruction.
What I object most about
those people who oppose
capital punishment is that
they believe that the lives of
convicted murderers are more
important than the lives of the
policemen and prison guards
who protect us.
FALSE ANALOGY- drawing an analogy
between two things where a relevant
difference exists between them.

It is evident that women

should be elected to political
office since government is
similar to national
housekeeping; and in this
respect it is obvious that
women have more experience
than men.
CONTRARY TO FACT CONDITIONAL –
Altering a fact and then assuming that its
consequent will also be altered. It falsely
concludes from speculative hypothesis
instead of arguing from actual facts.
If the President did not choose the Speaker
of the House as the administration bet, the
administration party might have won the
election.

I met an accident because I took a short cut

This morning on my way to work.
If I had taken my regular route then I would
have avoided the incident.
 BEGGING THE QUESTION or VICIOUS
CIRCLE – This fallacy holds that the
premises of the argument presuppose
the truth of its conclusion.

Arguer asserts as truth the answer to a

question that is really at issue in the
debate.
Whiskey causes drunkenness because it
is intoxicating.
The reason that abortion is wrong is that
It is wrong to kill babies who don’t have any
chance to represent themselves.