LOGICAL REASONING

FALLACIES ➢ The masked man is Mr. Hyde. The witness

• Fallacies are flaws within the logic or reasoning of believes that a masked man committed the crime.
an argument. Therefore, the witness believes that Mr. Hyde
• Fallacies can appear intentionally or committed the crime.
unintentionally. 4. Non Sequitur
• Intentional fallacies are generally tricks used to • A fallacy wherein someone asserts a conclusion
arrive at conclusions while unintentional fallacies that does not follow from the propositions. It can
are errors. be when what is presented as evidence or reason
• Generally speaking, fallacies can be classified as is irrelevant or adds very little support to the
formal and informal fallacies. conclusion.
• Formal fallacies are created when the • The logical form of Non Sequitur fallacy is,
relationship between premises and conclusion ➢ Claim A is made.
does not hold up or when premises are unsound. Evidence is presented for claim A.
• Informal fallacies are more dependent on misuse Therefore, claim C is true.
Examples:
of language and of evidence.
▪ All Dubliners are from Ireland. Ronan is not a
FORMAL FALLACIES
Dubliner, therefore, he is not Irish.
1. Bad Reasons Fallacy
(The conclusion does not follow the premises. We
• This fallacy consists in arguing that a conclusion is
cannot say that Ronan is not Irish because he
false because an argument given for it is bad.
does not come from Dublin).
• We can write Bad Reasons fallacy as:
▪ People generally like to walk on the
The reason A given for argument B is bad,
beach. Beaches have sand. Therefore, having
therefore conclusion B is not valid.
sand floors in homes would be a great idea!
• It's always possible to give a bad argument for a
(The fact that people generally like to walk on sand
true statement, and that doesn't mean that a good
does not mean that they want sand in their
argument for it cannot be found.
homes).
Examples:
5. Ad Hominem
➢ Dogs are afraid of heights, therefore dogs don't fly.
• Emphasizing on personal attacks based on the
(Though it may be true that dogs are afraid of
appearance, characteristics. background, style, or
heights, that is not the reason why they do not fly).
personality, instead of focusing on the logical
➢ Ostrich cannot fly; therefore, they are not birds.
arguments.
(It is true that ostrich cannot fly, but they are in fact
• It is a formal fallacy because it violates the rules of
birds).
valid deductive reasoning.
2. Appeal to Probability
• In a valid deductive argument, the
• This is a statement that takes something for
conclusion should follow logically from the
granted because it is probable or possible.
premises, and the truth or falsity of the
• One is not sure about the conclusion but is
premises should be relevant to the
assuming it to be true because there is a
conclusion.
probability that it might be true.
• Ad hominem attacks, however, divert attention
Example:
away from the argument's content and instead
I see a dark cloud on the horizon.
focus on the person making the argument, which is
Dark clouds mean rain.
not a valid way to assess the truth or validity of the
It's going to rain here today.
argument.
(Here we are not sure if it will rain or not, but dark
Examples
cloud means there is a probability for rain).
➢ "The politician's argument for healthcare reform
3. Masked Man Fallacy
shouldn't be taken seriously because he's been
• Also known as the Intentional Fallacy, it involves a
divorced three times.“
substitution of parties.
➢ "Don't listen to the scientist; she's a vegetarian, so
• If the two things that are interchanged are
she can't possibly understand the benefits of a
identical,
meat-based diet."
then the argument is assumed to be valid.
6. Begging the Question (Petitio Principii)
Examples:
• In such cases, the answer is assumed in the
➢ Jeremy's private investigator reported that a man
beginning.
with a beard was having dinner with his wife.
• It is a form of circular reasoning
Jeremy's best friend, Ronnie, has a beard.
• It occurs when an argument's premises assume
Therefore, Ronnie is having an affair with Jeremy's
the truth of the conclusion, making the argument
wife.
logically invalid.
1
Vallath Education Pvt. Ltd 67, Vrindavan Gardens, Pattom, Trivandrum, Kerala Ph: 9387839871
• The argument doesn't provide any new information • "Dr. Smith, a Nobel laureate, said that this diet is
or evidence to support the conclusion but instead the best, so it must be true."
relies on the conclusion itself to justify its • "My favorite celebrity endorsed this product, so it
premises. must be effective."
Examples Ad Populum (Appeal to Popular Opinion)
• "The Bible is the word of God because God wrote • Sometimes called the appeal to common
it, and it says so in the Bible." belief or appeal to the masses or the
• "I'm a good leader because my team always bandwagon fallacy
follows my orders." • Taking something as true just because it is widely
INFORMAL FALLACIES accepted.
Slippery Slope • “Everyone else is doing it” or “everyone else thinks
• In a slippery slope argument, a course of action is this” kind of situation
rejected because, with little or no evidence, one Examples
insists that it will lead to a chain reaction resulting • "Everyone is buying the latest smartphone, so it
in an undesirable end or ends. The slippery slope must be the best one on the market."
involves an acceptance of a succession of events • "Most people believe in astrology, so it must be a
without direct evidence that this course of events valid science."
will happen. Appeal to Consequence
Examples: • Considering something true only if it has a
▪ Earlier this year in New York, a cop killed a desirable consequence.
pedestrian on the following reasoning: Oh! Here is • Occurs when someone argues that a statement or
a man who is scratching his head in public. He is proposition must be true or false based on the
so rude! Next he will pick his nose. Then when he positive or negative consequences that would
gets on the bus, he will put his germs on the result if it were true or false, rather than providing
handrail. The next moment an inadvertent child's evidence or logical reasoning to support the claim.
mouth will touch it. And then the child will get sick. Examples
Then, his whole family will get sick as well. There • "If we don't pass this law, our country will collapse
will be an outbreak of disease in the city! The cop into chaos."
could not bear thinking any further, and fired his • "You should believe in this religion because if you
gun. don't, you'll go to hell."
▪ Today late for ten minutes, tomorrow late for an Complex Cause
hour, and then someday you will simply cease to • A.k.a the fallacy of the single cause or causal
show up. oversimplification
▪ If we ban one type of weapon, the government will • When only one factor or event is considered as the
take away all our firearms. cause of a complex event.
Ad Ignorantiam (Appeal to Ignorance) • Occurs when someone attributes a complex event
• Assuming a premise to be true because it has not or phenomenon to a single, simplistic cause, often
been proven wrong. ignoring other factors or causes that could
• It relies on the absence of evidence to make a contribute to the event.
claim, which is not a valid form of reasoning. Examples
Examples • "The crime rate is rising because the city built a
• “Nobody has proven that ghosts don't exist, so new library, and people have more time to read
they must be real.” crime novels."
• “There's no evidence that aliens haven't visited • "The stock market crashed because the president
Earth, so it's likely they have.” wore a red tie that day, and red is an unlucky
Ad Verecundiam (Appeal to Authority) color."
• Considering something as true because it is Complex Questions
believed to be true by some authoritative person. • It arises when two different points are linked
• While appeals to authority can sometimes be together and presented in one statement.
persuasive and reasonable when the authority • Occurs when someone asks a question that
figure is indeed an expert on the topic at hand, contains an unwarranted or false assumption,
they are considered fallacious when: making it difficult for the person being questioned
1. The authority is not relevant to the argument. to answer without falling into a trap or accepting
2. The authority is not a true expert on the topic. the assumption.
3. The consensus among experts in the field is • Often involve presuppositions or hidden
divided, and the argument relies on the opinion of assumptions that may not be justified.
a minority of experts. Examples
Examples

2
Vallath Education Pvt. Ltd 67, Vrindavan Gardens, Pattom, Trivandrum, Kerala Ph: 9387839871
• "Have you stopped cheating on your exams?" • "Claiming that a local politician is an expert in
(Assumes the person has cheated without climate science and should be trusted on global
evidence.) warming issues is a false authority."
• "When did you decide to start supporting this False Analogy
terrible policy?" (Presumes the person supports a • Comparing non-similar things
terrible policy.) • The argument assumes that because two things
Correlation Implies Causation are alike in one or a few aspects, they must be
• Considering the cause and effect relationship alike in other respects as well.
between two related events, while ignoring the Examples
other variables. • "Comparing studying for a test to training for a
• When someone incorrectly assumes that just marathon is a false analogy. While they both
because two variables are correlated, one must involve preparation, they are fundamentally
cause the other different activities."
• A.k.a post hoc ergo propter hoc – means "after • Joan and Mary both drive pickup trucks. Joan is a
this, therefore because of this." teacher; then, Mary must also be a teacher.
Examples False Dilemma
• "Ice cream sales and drowning incidents both • Also known as a false dichotomy or the either-or
increase in the summer, so ice cream consumption fallacy
must cause drownings." • Giving only two options out of many options
• "People who buy umbrellas tend to get sick more • Occurs when someone presents a situation as
often, so buying umbrellas must make you sick." having only two options or possibilities when, in
Cum Hoc, Ergo Propter Hoc reality, there are more than two viable alternatives.
• Means "with this, therefore because of this." • Can be misleading because it limits the options
• Occurs when someone assumes that just because presented to the audience and may ignore
two events or conditions happen to occur together, nuanced or alternative solutions
one must have caused the other. Examples
Examples • "You're either with us or against us in this war on
• "The rise in air pollution has occurred drugs." (Implies there are only two options when
simultaneously with the increase in smartphone there may be more.)
usage, so smartphones must be causing pollution." • "Either we cut funding for education or we go
• "Whenever I wear my lucky socks, it rains, so my bankrupt." (Presents only two extreme choices
socks must be causing the rain." when there could be other solutions.)
Equivocation Faulty Cause and Effect
• Using words with different meanings • Occurs when someone assumes that just because
• Occurs when a word or phrase is used with one event precedes another, the first event must
multiple meanings in an argument, and the have caused the second event.
argument relies on switching between these • It involves mistakenly inferring a cause-and-effect
meanings to create a false appearance of relationship between two events based solely on
consistency or validity. their temporal sequence.
Examples Examples
• "The sign said 'Fine for parking here,' so I parked • "Every time I wear my lucky socks, my team wins,
there, and I got a ticket. They fined me for being so my lucky socks must be the reason we win."
fine!" • "The rooster crows, and then the sun rises, so the
• "No one who's mentally stable would run for public rooster must cause the sun to rise."
office. I'm running for office, so I must be mentally Hasty Generalizations
unstable." • It occurs when someone draws a broad conclusion
False Authority based on insufficient or limited evidence, typically
• When advice is given by a person who is not an by making a generalization about a whole group,
expert in the field category, or population based on a small or
• Results when the person making an argument unrepresentative sample.
doesn’t actually have the qualifications to be • Drawing conclusions from incomplete information
credible but is perceived as credible because they Examples
are respected or admired. • "I met one rude person from that city, so everyone
Examples from that city must be rude."
• "A celebrity endorsing a skincare product doesn't • "I tried one dish from that cuisine, and I didn't like
make them a dermatologist, so their opinion on its it, so I won't like any food from that culture."
effectiveness is a false authority." Moral Equivalence

3
Vallath Education Pvt. Ltd 67, Vrindavan Gardens, Pattom, Trivandrum, Kerala Ph: 9387839871
• Occurs when someone suggests that two actions • When the criticism provided by someone is turned
or situations are morally equivalent or equally against them.
wrong, even when there may be significant • Occurs when someone attempts to dismiss or
differences in the moral culpability or context of refute an opponent's argument by pointing out
those actions their opponent's hypocrisy or inconsistent
• Comparing things of unequal size and treating it as behavior, rather than addressing the substance of
equal. the argument itself.
Examples • “You are a hypocrite, so your argument is invalid,”
• "Stealing a candy bar is just as bad as committing Examples
armed robbery." • "You can't tell me not to smoke; you had a
• "Telling a white lie to spare someone's feelings is cigarette last week." (Dismisses criticism by
as immoral as cheating on a test." pointing out the accuser's past behavior.)
Stacking the Deck • "You say cheating is wrong, but you cheated on a
• When one side of the argument is missed out test once." (Uses the other person's hypocrisy to
Example: avoid addressing the issue.)
• Product Reviews Online: A company posts glowing The Fallacy of Composition
customer reviews of its own product on its website • It arises when one infers that something is true of
but selectively filters out or doesn't publish any the whole from the fact that it is true of some part
negative feedback. As a result, potential customers of the whole.
only see positive reviews, giving a false impression Examples:
that the product is flawless. This is a "stacking the ➢ This tyre is made of rubber, therefore the vehicle of
deck" fallacy because it presents an incomplete which it is a part is also made of rubber.
and biased view of customer satisfaction, leading ➢ Paul is the smartest student in our school.
consumers to make decisions based on Since he is in my class, I must be in
incomplete information. the smartest class.
Red Herring Fallacy of Accident
• When one person who is to refute allegations • An accident fallacy is an error in reasoning caused
ignore the questions asked by sweeping generalizations.
• The goal of a red herring is to mislead or confuse • While generalizing helps make the world easier to
the audience by shifting the focus to a different understand, often generalizations do not apply to
topic or argument that is unrelated to the matter at every situation.
hand. • An accident fallacy is using such a generalization
Examples to draw an incorrect conclusion about an obvious
• Distracting a child - “You’re right, that toy in the toy exception.
shop looks really fun. Let’s go home and see what Examples:
fun toys we have there!” Assuming that ‘birds can fly’ applies to all birds, and
• Changing plans - “We could definitely go to the therefore arguing, or even just believing, that a
pizza place for dinner. But have you heard about penguin can fly. While the statement that birds can fly
the new sushi restaurant just across the street? It’s is not false – because most birds can fly — penguins
supposed to be amazing!” are an exception. Penguins are among the limited
Straw Man Fallacy number of flightless birds and it would be logically
• Attacking the weak argument of another person fallacious to conclude otherwise based on the premise
instead of the stronger argument. ‘birds can fly.’
• Occurs when someone misrepresents or distorts Fallacy of Division
their opponent's argument or position in a way that • This common logical fallacy refers to an attribution
makes it easier to attack or refute. placed onto an entire class, assuming that each
• The term "straw man" comes from the idea of part has the same property as the whole. It is the
creating a figurative "dummy" argument that is opposite of fallacy of composition.
easy to knock down, rather than engaging with the • The fallacy of division takes the form of:
opponent's actual argument • X has property P. Therefore, all parts (or members)
Examples of X have this property P.
• "People who support stricter environmental • By grouping elements of a whole together and
regulations want to shut down all industry and assuming that every piece automatically has a
throw people out of work." certain attribute, we are often stating a false
• "Advocates for healthcare reform are just pushing argument.
for socialized medicine and government control of Examples:
all healthcare decisions." ➢ All men are mortal. Therefore, Socrates is mortal
Tu Quoque Fallacy (Appeal To Hypocrisy) (Fallacy of division).

4
Vallath Education Pvt. Ltd 67, Vrindavan Gardens, Pattom, Trivandrum, Kerala Ph: 9387839871
➢ The same example in Reverse form the fallacy of to part as well. When universal is true, particular is
composition: also true. When universal is false, particular is
➢ Socrates is mortal, Socrates is a man, hence all doubtful. When particular is false, universal will
men are mortal (fallacy of composition). also be false. If particular is true, universal is
➢ The United States is the richest country in the doubtful.
world. Therefore, everyone in the United States • Eg: A: All Indians are spiritual.
must be rich and live well. I: Some Indians are spiritual.
Q and A E: No Indians are spiritual.
1. Everyone believes that there is a soul. Therefore, O: Some Indians are not spiritual.
you should believe it. This inference commits Contradictory
which kind of fallacy? • If one is true, the other one is definitely false.
A. Ad Hominem • If one is false, the other one is definitely true.
B. Ad Populum • Both statements can’t be true or false
C. Fallacy of Accident simultaneously.
D. Fallacy of Ambiguity (June 2020) Contrary
2. Everyone believes that there is a soul. Therefore, • It is always between universal statements.
you should believe it. This inference commits • Both can’t be true simultaneously but both can be
which kind of fallacy? false.
A. Ad Hominem • If one statement is true, other is definitely false.
B. Ad Populum • If one statement is false, other is always doubtful.
C. Fallacy of Accident Sub-contrary
D. Fallacy of Ambiguity (June 2020) • Both statements are opposite to contrary
Ans: B. Ad Populum • It is always between two particular statements.
Classical Square of Opposition • Both statements can’t be false simultaneously, but
The categorical propositions having same subject and both can be true.
predicate terms may differ in quality and quantity or in • In case one statement is true, other is definitely
both. This differing is called opposition. doubtful.
• Contraries: A & E are a pair here. Cannot be true • In case, one statement is false, the other is
together but can be false together– two definitely true.
propositions when both have universal quantity but Sub-alternation
one affirms and the other denies its predicate of • It is always between a universal and a particular
the subject– i.e., if • If universal is true, the particular will be definitely
A-type is true, then E-type with same subject and true.
predicate is false. But if A is false, nothing can be • If universal statement is false, particular is doubtful
said about E. • If the particular statement is false, then universal
• Eg: All men are honest and will be definitely false.
No men are honest cannot be true together. • If the particular statement is true, universal is
If one is true, other is false. doubtful
• Contradictories: The combination with two pairs– • Truth moves downwards, and false moves
A & O and E & I. upwards.
The relation between two propositions having the Categorical Syllogism Standard Form Rule
same subject but differing in both quality and • It is an argument with two premises and one
quantity. One is the denial or negation of the other. conclusion.
Both can’t be true together. Both can’t be false • All three statements are categorical propositions.
together. If A-type statement is true, then the O- • It contains exactly three different terms. Each term
type statement with the same subject and is used exactly twice
predicate will be false. ✓ Major term (P): Predicate of conclusion (P stands
• Eg: If All men are honest is true for Predicate Term)
Some men are not honest will definitely be false ✓ Minor term (S): Subject of conclusion (S stands
• Sub-contraries: A pair of I & O-types– Particular for Subject Term)
statements with Same subject, same predicate, ✓ Middle term (M): Term that occurs in both premises
same quantity but different quality. Both cannot be ✓ Major Premise: Premise containing major term.
false together, but both can be true together. ✓ Minor Premise: Premise containing minor term
• Eg: Some judges are lawyers (I-type) and Some Q and A
judges are not lawyers (O-type) 1. If two propositions are connected in such a way
• Subalternation: Two pairs: A & I and E & O. Same that they cannot both be false although they may
subject, same predicate, same quality but different both be true, their relationship is called
quantity. What is true about the whole is applicable (Aug 2016)

5
Vallath Education Pvt. Ltd 67, Vrindavan Gardens, Pattom, Trivandrum, Kerala Ph: 9387839871
 a) Contrary Answer: b)
b) Sub-contrary 4. Which one of the following is the characteristic
c) Contradictory feature of an argument?
d) Sub-alternation Answer: b) 1. It is either valid or invalid
2. Among the following propositions two are related 2. It is neither valid nor invalid
in such a way that one is the denial of the other. 3. It is either true or false
Which are those propositions Select the correct 4. It is neither true nor false
code: Answer: 1
Propositions: (July 2016) 5. Given below are two premises with four
i. All women are equal to men conclusions drawn from them. Which of the
ii. Some women are equal to men following conclusions can be validly drawn from
iii. Some women are not equal to men the premises? (June 2019)
iv. No women are equal to men Premises: 1) All fans are tubes
Codes: 2) Bulbs are not Tubes
a) (i) and (ii) Conclusions: (A) Fans are not Bulbs
b) (i) and (ii) (B) All tubes are fans
c) (iii) and (iv) (C) Fans are bulbs
d) (i) and (iii) (D) No tube is bulb
3. A reasoning where we start with a certain Options:
particular statement and conclude with a universal (a) A, B, C
statement is called __________ (b) A and D
a) Deductive reasoning (c) A only
b) Inductive reasoning (d) B, C and D
c) Abnormal reasoning Answer: (b)
d) Transcendental reasoning

6
Vallath Education Pvt. Ltd 67, Vrindavan Gardens, Pattom, Trivandrum, Kerala Ph: 9387839871