Fallacies

• A fallacy is a flaw in reasoning that makes an argument appear

valid when it actually is not. They can be intentional or
unintentional, but regardless, they lead to faulty conclusions.
Key features of a fallacy
 Error in reasoning: The structure of the argument itself is
flawed, even if the premises are true.
 Appears valid: The argument can be seemingly convincing
and persuasive, even if it doesn't hold up under scrutiny.
 False conclusion: Ultimately, the fallacy leads to a conclusion
that is not justified by the evidence or logic presented.
 Types of fallacies:
1. Formal Fallacies:

Formal fallacies: These flaws stem from the logical structure of the
argument
a) Affirming the consequent: Assuming that because the consequence of
a statement is true, the statement itself must also be true.

Examples:
 "This drug cured my friend's disease, so it must be effective for
everyone with the same disease." Individual results may vary, and
larger scale studies are needed to assess the true effectiveness of
a drug.
 "This country has a low crime rate and strict gun control
laws. Therefore, gun control laws must reduce
crime." Correlation does not imply causation. Other factors like
socioeconomic conditions or law enforcement practices might
play a role in crime rates.
 "This company only hires the best employees, and they all
went to prestigious universities. Therefore, attending a
prestigious university guarantees you a job at this
company." While attending a top school can be
beneficial, many other factors contribute to landing a job at a
specific company.
b) Denying the antecedent: Assuming that because the
antecedent of a statement is false, the statement itself must also
be false.

o Example: "If you study hard, you will get good grades. I
didn't get good grades, so I must not have studied
hard." (Other factors could have affected grades, like illness
or lack of understanding.)
2. Informal fallacies
• Informal fallacies: These flaws arise from how the argument is
presented or the language used, like ad hominem attacks or
straw man fallacies.
a) Ad hominem attack: Attacking the person making the
argument instead of their argument itself.
o Example: "You can't trust that scientist, they're known
for being biased." (Doesn't address the validity of the
scientist's argument)
b) Appeal to emotion: Using emotions to persuade someone
rather than logic or evidence.
o Example: "Support this charity because
otherwise, these poor children will suffer." (Doesn't
address the effectiveness of the charity or alternative
solutions.)
c) Straw man fallacy: Misrepresenting someone's argument to
make it easier to attack.
o Example: "You say we should protect the
environment? So you want us to all live in caves and
never use technology again?" (Exaggerates the
opponent's position to make it seem unreasonable.)
d) False analogy: Comparing two things that are not really similar in order
to make a point.
o Example: "Raising taxes is like stealing money from people. Just
like stealing your wallet is wrong, raising taxes must be wrong
too." (Taxation is a legal and regulated system, unlike stealing.)
o "Raising taxes is like taking candy from a baby. People don't like it,
and it's unfair." This analogy minimizes the purpose of taxation in funding
public services and ignores the potential benefits of fair tax systems.

e) Slippery slope: Assuming that one small step will inevitably lead to a
disastrous outcome, without evidence.
o Example: "If we allow same-sex marriage, then people will start
marrying animals next!" (No evidence to support this claim.)
f) A hasty generalization fallacy is a claim made on
the basis of insufficient evidence. Instead of looking
into examples and evidence that are much more in line
with the typical or average situation, you draw a
conclusion about a large population using a small,
unrepresentative sample.
Example: "I met one rude taxi driver, so all taxi
drivers must be rude." Just because you had one
negative experience doesn't mean it applies to the entire
population of taxi drivers.
"This restaurant had terrible service, so all
restaurants in this city must be bad." Judging an
entire city's dining scene based on one experience is
inaccurate and misleading.
• “A study of 100 teenagers showed increased
aggression after playing violent video games, so
all video games cause violence." A small sample
size can't represent an entire population, and other
factors might explain the aggression.
g) The false cause fallacy, another common thinking
trap, occurs when you incorrectly assume that one event
directly causes another event, even though there’s no
evidence to support that connection.
Example: "The crime rate went up after the new
video game was released, so the game must be
causing crime." Complex social issues like crime have
numerous contributing factors, and simply correlating
them with a recent event is misleading.
h) The bandwagon fallacy occurs when someone
encourages you to adopt a belief or action simply
because many other people are doing so. It implies that
popularity translates to correctness, which isn't always
the case.
Example: "This restaurant has a long line, so it
must be amazing!" Popularity doesn't always
guarantee quality, and waiting in line may not be worth it
if the food doesn't live up to the hype.
i) The appeal to tradition fallacy occurs when
someone argues that something is good or true
simply because it has always been done that way.
While tradition can hold value and provide stability, it
doesn't guarantee that past practices are superior or
without flaws.
Example: "Corporal punishment has been used for
generations to discipline children, so it must be
effective." Tradition doesn't justify harmful
practices. Modern research and understanding of child
development highlight gentler and more effective
methods of discipline.
"This religious text has been interpreted this way
for centuries, so any new interpretation must be
wrong." Blind adherence to traditional interpretations
can miss valuable insights and limit deeper
j) The false authority fallacy occurs when someone
uses an individual's credentials or status to support a
claim, even if that individual lacks genuine expertise or
authority on the specific topic at hand.
Celebrity endorsement: "A famous actor says this
brand of vitamins is the best, so it must be true!"
(The actor might be an expert in acting, not nutrition.)
k) Equivocation: one term ambiguously interpreted
Eg. Freedom of speech
EXERCISES
Choose the answer that best identifies the fallacy
used in the following statements.
1. Everyone at the party said the new restaurant was
amazing, so it must be the best place to eat in town.
a) Bandwagon fallacy b) Appeal to popularity c) Ad
hominem fallacy d) False dilemma
2. My friend got a bad grade on this test, so the teacher
must be unfair.
a) Hasty generalization b) Appeal to emotion c) False
analogy d) Slippery slope
3. Politician A: "My opponent wants to raise taxes, which
will destroy the economy! We can't afford that!"
a) Straw man fallacy b) Appeal to fear c) False cause
fallacy d) Ad hominem fallacy
1.4. "I'm a celebrity, so you should listen to my opinion
on this important issue."
a) False authority fallacy b) Appeal to emotion c)
Bandwagon fallacy d) Straw man fallacy
5. "Teenagers who listen to loud music are more likely to
be criminals because they are all rebellious and angry."
a) Hasty generalization b) Stereotyping c) False cause
fallacy d) Appeal to nature
6. "This new law is bad because it's just like the one that
failed in another country."
a) False analogy b) Appeal to tradition c) Slippery slope
fallacy d) Ad hominem fallacy