FALLACIES

Common
Mistakes in
Thinking
SUBMITTED BY:
CHRISTIAN JOHN CUNANAN
6.1 NATURE OF FALLACES. The term fallacy is derived from
the Latin infinitive fallere, which means “to deceive” or to appear
false or deceptive” (Babor , 2003).

Sophism or sophistry is a fallacy committed with the in

intention to deceive or mislead an opponent.

Paralogism is when it is done unknowingly, or due to the

ignorance of the rules of reasoning.
6.2 KINDS OF FALLACIES. Although most textbook of logic
contain discussion of fallacies, their treatments are not all the
same. Many times a fallacy is classified under different heading.

1. Fallacies of Relevance. The mistake arguments under this

classification rely on premises that seem to be relevant to the
conclusion but in fact are not.
a. Argumentum ad Baculum (Arguments to Force). An
arguments to force occurs when someone resorts to force to push
others to accepts a conclusion.
Example:
“There is ample proof of the Bible. All those who

refuse to accept the truth will burn in Hell.”

 b. Argumentem ad Crumenan (Argument to the
Money). This fallacy is committed when the appeal is made to
the sense of greed or cupidity of an individual. Instead of resoning
out of an argument, money is used, for instance, to bride the
opponent to concede. (Timbreza, 1992).
Example:
When a jeepney driver bribes a traffic policeman
who catches him violating traffic regulations, he is using the
argument of thee money.
“Please give me a passing mark, Sir. Ako na ang
bahala sa iyo. Pwede nating pag-usapan, Sir, kung magkano.”
 c. Argumentum ad Hominem (Argument to the
Man). This fallacy is committed when an attack is aimed not at
the claims being made or the merits of the arguments, but at the
opponent or the person speaking. Thus, in argumentum ad
hominem, it is the person who presents the argument who is
being attacked, not the issue or the conclusion of an argument.
Examples:
“How can my opponent be relied upon? He is an
ex-convict.”
“ Is this the person you are going to marry? He has
the kind of face that only his mother would
like to see.”
“ You claims that atheists can be moral—yet I
happen to know you abandoned your wife
and children.”
 d. Argumentum ad Ignorantian (Argument to
Ignorance). When it is argued that a proposition is true on the
ground that it has not been proven false, or when it is argued that
a proposition is false because it has not been proven true,
argumentum ad ignorantiam is commtted.
Examples:
“Of course, telepathy and other psychic
phenomena do not exist. Nobody has
shown any proof that they are real.”
“The existence of purgatory must be true, because
nobody has ever successfully defended that
it is just a product of imagination.”
“You cannot disprove my assertion. Therefore, I am
right and you are wrong.”
 e. Argumentum ad Misericordiam (Argument to
Pity). Argument to pity is a fallacious argument that arise when
an appeal to evidenceis replaced by an appeal to pity, mercy, or
sympathy.
Examples:
“You must accept that 1+1=46, after all I’m dying.”
(While one may pity the other person
because he/she is dying, it would hardly
make his/her claim true.)
“I’m positive that my work will meet your
requirements. Besides, I really need the job
because my grandmother is sick.”
 f. Argumentum ad Populum (Argument to the
People). One commits this fallacy when one attempts to win
acceptance of an assertion by appealing to a large group of
people. This form of fallacy is often characterized by emotive
language.
Example:
“Buy this brand X detergent bar because most
Visayans use it.”
g. Argumentum ad Verecundiam (Argument to
Authority). This fallacy appeals to an authority to try to win
support for an assertion.
Example:
“There is God because my professor says so.”
 h. Ignoratio Elenchi (Ignorance of Refutation). This
fallacy consists in proving something other that which is supposed
to be proven. Thus, this fallacy is called “ignorance the issue”,
“missing the point,” and the “evading the question.”
Examples:
The retention policy of the colleges has affected
many students, specifically the poor.
The only solution to this is to abolish the policy.
i. Non Sequitur means “it does not follow”. This fallacy is
committed when the conclusion of an argument is not logically
connected to its premise.
Examples
“John is an American, therefore, he is good in
dancing .”
 j. Tu Quoque this mean “you, too” which can translate to
“you’re another” or “ look who’s talking.” it occurs when one
argues that an action is acceptable because the opponent has
performed it.
Example:
“You say I should not smoke, but why are you
smoking.”

2. Fallacies of Presumption . In this category, the mistaken

arguments arise from dependence on a proposition that it is
assumed to be true, but is in fact false or dubious or without
warrant.
 a. Begging the Question. This is a fallacy in which the
premises include the claim that conclusion is true or assume that
the conclusion is true.
Example:
“The belief in God is universal. After all, everyone
believes in God”.
b. Fallacy of Accident. This fallacy arises when what is
accidental is confused with what is essential.
Example:
“This is not my professor because my professors
wear glasses, and this man is not wearing
glasses.”
 c. Fallacy of False Cause. This fallacy, also called post hoc,
occurs when the arguer points to something as the cause of the
event simply because the event followed it. Superstitious belief
are example of this fallacy.
Example:
“Jack killed the black cat. The following day he die.
Therefore, it is the killing of the black cat
that cause his death.
d. Fallacy of Complex Question. This fallacy is committed
when a single question that is actually of two (or more) separate
question is asked, and the single answer is then applied to both
questions.
Example:
“Have you stopped cheating on exams?
3. Fallacies in Language: Mistake argument in this group are
due to lack of preciseness in the words, phrases, or sentences
used to express thoughts.
a. Accent or Prosody arises when a false stress of voice is
placed interpretation.
b. Amphiboly occurs when premise used in the argument are
ambiguous because of careless or ungrammatical phrasing. It is a
statement with double meaning.
Examples:
For sale: “Convertible sofa of a model used only for
a week.”
Lost: “Cat of a girl with white fur.”
 c. Fallacy of Composition is committed due to the assumption
that the whole has the characteristic of its parts. This happens
when one transfers the characteristics of the parts unto the
whole, by arguing that since the parts have some characteristic,
the whole must necessarily have them.
Example:
A tiger eats more food that a human being.
Therefore, tiger, as a group, eat more food
than do all the human on earth.
d. Fallacy of Division is committed when one assumes that the
parts have the characteristic of the whole. This is the opposite of
the fallacy of composition.
Example:
“You are studying at a college for rich students.
Therefore, you must be rich.”
 e. Equivocation comes from the word equi mean equal and vox
mean voice, which together means “with equal voice.” When a
term is used univocally in an argument, it has same meaning
throughout, but when it used equivocally, more than one meaning
is given equal voice.
Example:
Logic teaches you how to argue.
People argue entirely too much.
Therefore we don’t need to teach people logic.
f. Fallacy of Figure of Speech occur when on concludes that a
similarity in the construction of one term with another establishes
a corresponding similarity in their meaning. One argues from the
construction of one word to the form and the construction of
another.
Examples:
Insecure is the contradictory of secure. Insincere is also the
contradictory of sincere.
Anybody restless is not restful; anybody careless is not
careful; therefore, anybody helpless is not helpful.
g. Fallacy of Hasty Generalization occurs when the arguer
makes a sweeping conclusion from a few instances or cases. The
truths in the individual cases cited by the arguer are insufficient to
represent a universal truth.
Example:
“All of you are cheaters since I caught two of you
cheating. This class of forty students cannot,
therefore, be trusted.”