COLUMBAN COLLEGE

BARRIO BARRETTO
OLONGAPO CITY

In Partial Fulfilment
of a requirement
in PHL101
Submitted to:
Rev. John Nathaniel M. Cube

Submitted by:
Ocop, Cedrick Daniel D.V.

March 19, 2015

INTRODUCTION
A fallacy is an erroneous reasoning or an incorrect argument. As a rule, an argument is
not considered fallacious unless it is plausible enough to appear to provide adequate evidence for
its conclusion. This is the reason why some people, Its not true it just seems true! Just as evil
can attract because of its apparent goodness, error can deceive when presented with source
apparent truth.
Coming from the Latin term fallere, fallacy means, to deceive. It is a type of argument
that may seem to be valid but which proves, upon examination, not to be so. At the same time
that it conceals error, it projects an apparent truth. It usually begins by appealing to some genuine
truths. However, these truths are often presented in such an ambiguous and general way that they
are easily distorted. This manipulation of apparent truth is important to win over the unguarded
listener since obvious error can never have an appeal. It is therefore important to recognize
where and when fallacy occurs because it can be very persuasive yet very deceptive.
In my own understanding, fallacy is a sugar-coated argument, breaking the metaphor up,
we would arrive to which fallacy is an argument that seems to be right, looks right and convince
us that it is correct, but in fact, in critical analysis of the argument, we can conclude that it is
false or fallacy. Later on it will be discussed that there are different kinds of fallacies so that we
can determine if it logical or not.

INFORMAL FALLACY
Informal fallacy is committed when irrelevant psychological factors are allowed to distort
the reasoning process, as when one uses pity or threat or character or character assassination, or
when one is confused by linguistic ambiguities in ones premises and conclusions. The word
informal here does not mean inferior, casual or improper. It only means that our focus is not on
the form of the argument, but on the meaning of the argument.
A. FALLACY OF LANGUAGE/ AMBIGUITY
This expresses lack of preciseness in the words, phrases or sentences used to express
thought.
Broader Sense: Using an ambiguous term in more than one sense, thus making an
argument misleading.
1.EQUIVOCATION
This fallacy is committed when a word carrying different meanings is used in the
same context in a particular argument. This fallacy is also called fallacy of four terms.
Example # 1
I want to have myself a merry little Christmas, but I refuse to do as the song
suggests and make the yuletide gay. I don't think sexual preference should have anything
to do with enjoying the holiday.
Example # 2
The priest told me I should have faith.
I have faith that my son will do well in school this year.
Therefore, the priest should be happy with me.

Example #3
No man is made of paper. All pages are men. Therefore, no pages are made of paper.

2. AMPHIBOLY
This fallacy is committed when the awkward construction of ones sentence
allows a double meaning caused by inexactness of expression. The grammatical
construction of a sentence is not clear and is therefore open to different interpretations.
Example #1
It is said that we have a good understanding of our universe. Therefore, we know
exactly how it began and exactly when.
Example #2
All living beings come from other living beings. Therefore, the first forms of life must
have come from a living being. That living being is God.
Example #3
This man his father killed.
3. ACCENT OR PROSODY
This fallacy arises from a false accent or a false emphasis in speech. A false stress of
voice is placed upon a given word in order to mislead, confuse, or produce a wrong
interpretation.
Example # 1
Every invalid needs care and attention. Every fallacy is invalid. Therefore, Every fallacy
needs care and attention.
Example # 2

Example # 3

4. COMPOSITION
This fallacy arises when a properly of the parts is illicitly taken to belong to the whole. It
consists in taking collectively what should be taken individually. It states that whatever true is
true or each member of a given set of objects is true of the set itself. We have these examples.
Example # 1
The students from RMTU come from the different barrios of Iba. Monica is a student of
RMTU. Therefore, Monica is from the different barrios of Iba.
Example # 2
Calculators are efficient. 991-ES Plus is a calculator. Therefore, 991-ES Plus is
efficient.
Example # 3
Tony is a board passer. All Engineers are board passer. Therefore, All Engineers are
Tony.

5. DIVISION
This fallacy consists in taking individually what should be taken collectively. It states that
what is true of the whole is true of the parts of the whole.
Example # 1

BSIE students make up a good class. Angelo is a BSIE student. Therefore, Agelo makes
up a good class.
Example # 2

Example # 3

6. WORD CONSTRUCTION
This fallacy infers a similarity of meaning from the similarity of the material pattern of
the two words.
Example # 1
Example # 2
Example # 3

B. FALLACY OF RELEVANCE
This kind of fallacy arises when something about an argument tempts us simply to
overlook the fact that there really is no connection between the premises and the conclusion.
The argument excites us somehow, and we are misled into thinking that the premises support
the conclusion, when actually they have nothing to do with the point supposedly being
proven. Fallacies of this sort are called fallacies of relevance (ignoratio elenchl) because it
ignores the relevant connection between the premises and the conclusion.

1. ACCIDENT
This fallacy is committed when an exception to the general rule is ignored.
Example # 1
This coke is in a very elegant bottle. Therefore, it must taste good and refreshing.
Example # 2
Example # 3

2. PETITIO PRINCIPII
This fallacy is committed when an argument fails to prove anything because it
somehow takes for granted what it is supposed to prove.
Example # 1
Souls can never die because they are immortal.
Example # 2
The mind is spiritual because it is immaterial. The mind is immaterial because it is
spiritual.
Example # 3
Plastic materials lasts forever.

3. ARGUMENTUM AD HOMINEM (Attack Against Man)

This fallacy is an attack on the character of the person rather than a challenge to
the merit of his argument.

a. Abusive - this fallacy consists in attacking the person instead of proving or

disproving the point at issue.
b. Circumstantial this fallacy attempts to attack a claim by asserting that
the person making the claim is making it simply out of self-interest or
owing to his personal circumstances.
c. Look whos talking! Tu quoque this fallacy attempts to defend oneself
from criticism by turning the critique back against the accuser.
Example # 1
He is an ex-convict. He was convicted once of murder.
Example # 2
Why should we believe in the statement of Ka Doming?
Example # 3
You say that Im ugly. Look whos talking.

4. ARGUMENTUM AD POPULUMN (Appeal to People)

This fallacy consists in asserting that a claim is correct just because people
generally believe it is. It alleges, if many believe so, it is so.
Example # 1
Example # 2
Example # 3

5. ARGUMENTUM AS MISERICORDIAM (Appeal to Pity)

This fallacy consists in pleading for mercy and disregarding the point in question.
The appeal must be irrelevant to the conclusion being sought.
Example # 1
Example # 2
Example # 3

6. FALSE CAUSE
This fallacy mistakes what is not the cause of a given effect for it its real cause. A
narrower version of this fallacy is called post hoc ergo, propter hoc (after this,
therefore because of this).
Example # 1
Example # 2
Example # 3

7. ARGUMENTUM AD VERECUNDIAM (Appeal to Misplaced Authority)

This fallacy is an improper appeal made to alleged expert advice. This fallacy is
evident in an argument based not on the intrinsic merits of a view.
Example # 1
Example # 2
Example # 3

8. ARGUMENTUM AD BACULUM (Appeal to Force)

This fallacy appeals to physical force or moral pressure rather than the merit of
the point at issue to win an argument.
Example # 1
Example # 2
Example # 3

9. APPEAL TO ADVANTAGE
This is a fallacy where an appeal is made to a person(s) to adhere to a policy, or
perform an act contrary to the persons will. But he is forced to do it because the
advantage preferred is given.
Example # 1
Example # 2
Example # 3

10. ARGUMENTUM AD IGNORANTIAM (Appeal to Ignorance)

This fallacy is committed whenever one argues that something must be true on the
basis that it has not been proved false, or false on the basis that it has not been
proved true.
Example # 1
Example # 2
Example # 3

REFLECTION