12 Common Logical Fallacies to Avoid

[koolkat]

In our eagerness to prove our point, we all employ these logical fallacies, which really leave our argumentation exposed and vulnerable to attack. But knowing them may help us recognize and avoid them. 

Furthermore, by recognizing them in others, we can deal with them successfully. To this end, it is worthwhile learning their formal name, because by citing it we can impart some air of convincing authority.

Ad Hominem 

Ad hominem means “against the man,” and this type of fallacy is sometimes called name calling or the personal attack fallacy.

It occurs when someone attacks the person instead of attacking his or her argument. 

Example: A senator claims that his new tax plan will help the middle class. His opponent says that the rich senator doesn't care about the middle class. 

Strawman 

Someone argues that a person holds a view that is actually not what the other person believes. By exaggerating, misrepresenting or completely fabricating someone’s argument, it makes it easier to attack.

But apart from being logically invalid, it’s also dishonest. 

Ex. Caroline says that she thinks her friends should not be so rude to the new girl. Jenna says that she cannot believe that Caroline is choosing to be better friends with the new girl than the girls who have always known her.

Faulty Cause and Effect 

The belief that if event B occurs just after event A, then A causes B. 

Ex. Every time I wash my car, it rains the next day. Therefore, washing my car affects weather patterns.

Either-Or (Black and White, Excluded Middle or False Dilemma) 

Suggesting that there are only two possibilities for a situation, when in fact there are more. 

Ex. You are for us, or you are against us. 

Slippery Slope 

A party asserts that a relatively small first step leads to a chain of related events culminating in some significant (usually negative) effect. 

Ex. Legalizing prostitution would cause more marriages to break up, which would in turn cause the breakdown of the family, which would finally result in the destruction of the society and civilization.

Begging the Question 

The statement is assumed true based on the statement itself. 

Ex. The bible is the word of God, because it says so in the bible. 

Burden of Proof (Onus Probandi) 

Someone makes a claim, but puts the burden of proof onto the other side. 

But the burden of proof lies with the one making the claim and is not upon anyone else to disprove. Therefore the inability or disinclination of anybody else to disprove does not make it valid. 

Ex. A parent claims that the school is overcharging students for lunch. The teacher says that she does not believe that is happening. The parent asks the teacher to prove that lunch prices are fair. 

Anecdotal

 Using an isolated example instead of a valid argument, especially to dismiss statistics. And it is often much easier for people to understand a testimony or concrete case as opposed to statistical analysis. 

Ex. Jason said that that was all cool and everything, but his grandfather smoked like 30 cigarettes a day and lived until 97. So don’t believe everything you read.

Hasty Generalization 

An unwarranted inference is made from a statement about a sample to a statement about the population from which it is drawn. 

Ex. Someone travels through a town for the first time and sees 10 people, all of them children, and erroneously concludes that there are no adult residents in the town. 

Non Sequitur 

It means “It does not follow”.

A statement’s conclusion does not follow from its premises. 

Ex. If you don’t buy this foodstuff, then you are neglecting your children’s health. 

Appeal to Emotion 

Manipulating an emotional response in place of a valid argument. 

Ex. A political ad shows the candidate shaking hands with the community as he leaves church on Sunday morning. 

Tu Quoque (Look Who Is Talking) 

It means “You too”.

One avoids having to engage with criticism by turning it back on the accuser, thus answering criticism with criticism and shifting the focus back onto the accuser. The accusation itself is not answered. 

Of course, we see this all the time in political debates. 

Ex. Mother: You should stop smoking. It's harmful to your health. Daughter: You say that, yet you started smoking at 16!

The daughter dismisses her mother's argument as hypocritical. While the mother may indeed be inconsistent, this does not invalidate her argument.