Scribd
Upload
129 views12 pages

Iphp Fallacy

This document defines and provides examples of common logical fallacies: ad hominem attacks the person instead of the argument; appeal to force uses threats to convince rather than evidence; appeal to emotion uses feelings over logic; appeal to tradition accepts beliefs just because they are long-standing; begging the question assumes a claim is true without evidence; and hasty generalization makes broad claims based on limited evidence. It also discusses cause and effect errors, fallacies of composition and division, and appeals to popularity, ignorance, and equivocation.

Uploaded by

Feliya
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PPTX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
129 views12 pages

Iphp Fallacy

This document defines and provides examples of common logical fallacies: ad hominem attacks the person instead of the argument; appeal to force uses threats to convince rather than evidence; appeal to emotion uses feelings over logic; appeal to tradition accepts beliefs just because they are long-standing; begging the question assumes a claim is true without evidence; and hasty generalization makes broad claims based on limited evidence. It also discusses cause and effect errors, fallacies of composition and division, and appeals to popularity, ignorance, and equivocation.

Uploaded by

Feliya
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PPTX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 12

Ad Hominem

Ad hominem is a fallacy that is also known


as the personal attack fallacy or name-
calling fallacy. This type of fallacy occurs
when someone attacks the person instead
of attacking his or her argument.
Appeal to force

Appeal to force is an argument that uses force,


the threat of force, or some other unpleasant
backlash to make the audience accept a
conclusion. It commonly appears as a last
resort when evidence or rational arguments
fail to convince a reader.
Appeal to emotion

Emotion appeal is a type of manipulation used in


place of valid logic. Also known as: appeal to
pathos, argument by vehemence, playing on
emotions, emotional appeal, for the children. This
is the general category of many fallacies that use
emotion instead of reason to try and win an
argument.
Appeal to tradition

Appeal to Tradition is a type of logical


fallacy in which something is accepted as true
because it's the "way it's always been done".
There is no evidence that a specific belief or
course of action actually is better. It is just
believed to be better because it is the
traditional belief.“
Begging the Question

Begging the question is a fallacy in which a


claim is made and accepted to be true, but one
must accept the premise first. This is also
known as circular reasoning. Essentially, one
makes a claim based on evidence that requires
one to already accept that the claim is true.
Cause and effect
.
This fallacy falsely assumes that one
event causes another. Often a reader will
mistake a time connection for a cause-
effect connection.
Fallacy of composition

Occurs when someone assumes or


argues, “From the part to the whole,
ignoring the fact that what is true of
the part is not necessarily true of the
whole.”
Fallacy of division

Occurs when one concludes that


because something is true of the
whole, therefore, it is also true of
the parts.
Appeal to people

Consists of arguing that a claim is true


because a lot of people believe it, or that a
claim is false because a lot of people do not
believe it. Whether or not an idea is true is
rarely a matter of how many people believe
it.
Appeal to ignorance

Is also known as argument from ignorance, in


which ignorance represents “a lack of
contrary evidence” and becomes “a fallacy in
informal logic.” It asserts that a proposition is
true because it has not yet been proven as
false.
Hasty Generalization

Is sometimes called the over-generalization


fallacy. It is basically making a claim based on
evidence that it just too small. Essentially, you
can't make a claim and say that something is
true if you have only an example or two as
evidence.
Fallacy of Equivocation

Fallacy of Equivocation aka “calling two


different things by the same name,” is the
logical fallacy of using a word or phrase
in an argument either: In an ambiguous
way to mean two or more things.

You might also like

pFad - Phonifier reborn

Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.

Note: This service is not intended for secure transactions such as banking, social media, email, or purchasing. Use at your own risk. We assume no liability whatsoever for broken pages.


Alternative Proxies:

Alternative Proxy

pFad Proxy

pFad v3 Proxy

pFad v4 Proxy