Todays Topic:

FALLACIES: Relevance &

Ambiguity

What is a Fallacy?
We strive to reason correctly,
So one of the central tasks of logic is to identify
the ways in which we reason incorrectly, i.e.
when the premises of an argument fail to
support its conclusion
Argument of that sort may be called
fallacious.
So, in a very general sense, any error in
reasoning is a fallacy.

Example
If one accepts that all science is essentially
materialistic (premise) and then goes on to argue
that Karl Marx who was certainly a materialist, must
therefore have been scientific (conclusion), one
reasons badly.
It may indeed be true that Marx was scientific (as he claimed
to be), but it does not follow from the fact that he was a
materialist (which he certainly was) that he was scientific.
The bad reasoning here is fallacious.
Thus, fallacy is a type of an argument that may seem to be
correct but that proves on examination, not to be so (I M
Copi).

Formal and Informal

Fallacies

Formal fallacies are because of

bad logical form of an argument.

Informal fallacies are because

of :
1. Bad language

Fallacy of Ambiguity, Vague, Emotive, etc.

2. Irrelevancy of premises with conclusion

Fallacy of Relevance

1- Fallacies of Relevance
The most numerous
encountered.

and

the

most

frequently

The premises of the argument are simply not

relevant to the conclusion but they are made to
appear to be relevant.
The mistake arises when some emotive features of
language are used to support the truth of a claim for
which no objective reasons have been given.

Types:
R1: The Appeal to Emotion
R4: The Attack on the Person
R2: The Red Herring
R5: The Appeal to Force
R3: The Straw Man
R6: Missing the Point (Irrelevant
Conclusion)

R1: The Appeal to Emotion

Instead
of
evidence
and
rational
argument, the speaker/writer relies on
expressive language to excite enthusiasm
for or against some cause.
E.g. most commercial advertisements

Sub types:
a) Appeal to pity
b) Bandwagon fallacy

a) Appeal to Pity (Examples)

Relying implicitly on appeal to pity
I know the exam is graded based on performance.
My cat has been sick, my car broke down, and I've had a
cold.
So, it was really hard for me to study! I really need an
A.
It's wrong to tax corporations--think of all the money
they give to charity, and of the costs they already pay
to run their businesses!

b) Bandwagon Fallacy
Bandwagon means to do what others do
because so many others are doing it .
In other words, it is an appeal to popularity
(This fallacy basically asks an audience to
believe what everyone else believes.)
This is common in public media, e.g.

Pakistan is a failed state, as most of

the experts have said that.

R2: The Red Herring

The red herring is a fallacious argument whose
effectiveness lies in distraction.
Here, readers/listeners are drawn to some aspect of
the topic under discussion by which they are led
away from the issue that had been the focus of
discussion. E.g.

Police: Sir! What are you doing with this

diamond necklace hanging of your pocket?
Thief: Is not this a pure bred German
Sheppard dog you have to got my dear
officer?

R2: The Red Herring (cont.)

A: You never remember my birthday?
B: Ah! Have I ever told you how nice
your new hairstyle looks?
A: Surely police should take some action
against protestors against global warming
as they are causing public inconvenience.
B: Certainly, global meltdown is a more
serious problem than a little inconvenience.

R3: Straw Man

It is very much easier to win a fight against a person
made of straw than against one made of flesh and blood.
If one argues against some view by presenting an
opponents position as one that is easily torn apart, the
argument is fallacious, of course.
Such an argument commits the fallacy of the straw man.
Example:

Cellular companies should be band in Pakistan.

As use of Cell phones for school going children is
harmful.

R4: Argument Against Man

Argument against Man is committed when
an argument is judged on the basis of the person
who puts forward the argument.
Sub types are:
a. ABUSIVE when the personal character of a person
is considered, while evaluating an argument. E.g.

In congratulating my colleague on his new

job, let me point out that he has no more
experience of it than a weeping boy has
on his first day school

R4: Argument Against Man

(cont.)
b. CIRCUMSTANTIAL

when,
special
circumstances of an arguer (which have
nothing to do with argument) are considered
while evaluating his/her argument. E.g.

The Dalai Lama argues that China has no business

in Tibet and that the West should do something
about it.
But the Dalai Lama just wants the Chinese to
leave so he can return as leader. Naturally he
argues this way.
Therefore, we should reject his arguments

R4: Argument Against Man

(cont.)

c. YOU TOO, is a fallacy in which one

rejects the argument /criticism by
turning the argument/criticism back
against the opponent. It is a very
effective fallacy because it puts the
opponent on the defensive. E.g.
Child to parent: Your argument that I
should stop stealing candy from the corner
store is no good.
You told me yourself just a week ago that
you, too, stole candy when you were a kid.

R4: Argument Against Man

(cont.)
d. BIAS TYPE OF ATTACK, the arguer is said
to have a personal bias, often in the form
of a financial interest or something to gain.
e. POISONING THE WELL is a pre-emptive
type of attack which disqualifies an arguer
before he/she says something. E.g.
Everyone except an idiot knows that not enough
money is spent on Education
Of course, there may be those with defective
judgment who prefer to train

R5: The Appeal to Force

Is committed when force, or the threat
of force, is relied on to win consent.
Example:
The President continues to have confidence in the
Secretary, and if anyone has a different view of
that, he can tell me as we dont want to retain
such peoples.
Child to playmate: XYZ is the best show on TV;
and if you dont believe it,
Im going to call my big brother over here and he
s going to beat you up.

R6: Missing the Point

The premises of an argument do support a
particular
conclusion--but
not
the
conclusion that the arguer actually draws.
Example: The seriousness of a punishment
should match the seriousness of the crime. Right
now, the punishment for drunk driving may simply
be a fine. But drunk driving is a very serious crime
that can kill innocent people. So the death penalty
should be the punishment for drunk driving.

Fallacies of Ambiguity

2- Fallacies of Ambiguity
The meaning of words or phrases may shift as a
result:
Inattention, or
deliberately
A term may have one sense in a premise but
quite a different sense in the conclusion.
Fallacies of ambiguity have 5 varieties:
A1:
A2:
A3:
A4:
A5:

Equivocation
Amphiboly
Accent
Composition
Division

A1: Equivocation
Most words have more than one literal
meaning, and most of the time we have no
difficulty keeping those meanings separate by
noting the context and using our good sense
when reading and listening.
Yet when we confuse the several meanings of
a word or phraseaccidentally or deliberately
we are using the word equivocally.
If we do that in the context of an argument,
we commit the fallacy of equivocation.

Example: Equivocation
1.
"Giving money to charity is the right thing
to do. So charities have a right to our money."
2.
Any law can be repealed by the legislative
authority.
But the law of gravity is a law.
Therefore, the law of gravity can be repealed
(cancel) by the legislative authority.

Sometimes an arguer will deliberately

equivocate, often on words like "freedom,"
"justice," "rights," and so forth; other times,
the
equivocation
is
a
mistake
or
misunderstanding.
Either way, it's important that you use the
main terms of your argument consistently.

A2: Amphiboly
Occurs when one is arguing from premises whose formulation
are ambiguous because of their grammatical construction.
A statement is amphibolous when its meaning is
indeterminate because of the loose or awkward way in which
its words are combined.

When it is stated as premise with the interpretation that

makes it true, and a conclusion is drawn from it on the
interpretation that makes it false, then the fallacy of
amphiboly has been committed. E.g.
Dr. Salick donated, along with his wife, Gloria, $4.5 million to Queens
College for the center.
Gloria is tax-deductible.
My friend said: I know a man with one wooden leg named Smith.
So, I asked him, What is the name of his other leg?

Amphiboly explained
The fallacy of amphiboly occurs when the arguer
misinterprets a statement that is syntactically ambiguous
and proceeds to draw a conclusion based on this faulty
interpretation.
The original statement is usually asserted by someone other
than the arguer, and the syntactical ambiguity usually
arises from a mistake in grammar or punctuationa missing
comma, a dangling modifier, an ambiguous antecedent of a
pronoun, or some other careless arrangement of words.

Some More Examples

The tour guide said that standing in Greenwich Village, the
Empire State Building could easily be seen.
It follows that the Empire State Building is in Greenwich Village.
John told Henry that he had made a mistake.
It follows that John has at least the courage to admit his own
mistakes.
Professor Johnson said that he will give a lecture about heart
failure in the biology lecture hall.
It must be the case that a number of heart failures have
occurred there recently.

A3: Accent
Whereas Equivocation occurs due to the shifting
of meaning of some term in an argument,
Sometimes, however, the shift is the result of a
change in emphasis on a single word or phrase,
whose meaning does not change.
When the premise of an argument relies on one
possible emphasis, but a conclusion drawn from it
relies on the meaning of the same words
emphasized differently, the fallacy of accent has
been committed. E.g.
We should not speak ill of our friends.

A4: Composition
is committed when the conclusion of an argument
depends on the erroneous transference of an
attribute from the parts of something onto the
whole.
In other words, the fallacy occurs when it is
argued that because the parts have a certain
attribute, it follows that the whole has that
attribute too and the situation is such that the
attribute in question cannot be legitimately
transferred from parts to whole.
E.g. because every part of a certain machine is light in
weight, the machine as a whole is light in weight.

Some more examples of

Composition
Each player on this basketball team is an excellent
athlete.
Therefore, the team as a whole is excellent.
Each atom in this piece of chalk is invisible.
Therefore, the chalk is invisible.
Sodium and chlorine, the atomic components of salt,
are both deadly poisons.
Therefore, salt is a deadly poison.

A5: Division
is the exact reverse of composition. As
composition goes from parts to whole,
division goes from whole to parts.
The fallacy is committed when the
conclusion of an argument depends on the
erroneous transference of an attribute from a
whole (or a class) onto its parts (or
members).
E.g. because a certain corporation is very
important and Mr. Khan is an officer of that
corporation, therefore, Mr. Khan is very important.

More examples: Division

Humans are mortal.
Socrates is a human.
Therefore, Socrates is mortal.
American Indians are disappearing.
That man is an American Indian.
Therefore, that man is disappearing.

Some more examples

Salt is a nonpoisonous compound.
Therefore, its component elements,
sodium and chlorine, are nonpoisonous
The Royal Society is over 300 years old.
Professor Thompson is a member of the
Royal Society.
Therefore, Professor Thompson is over
300 years old.

Can you name this Fallacy?

1) It is ridiculous to have spent thousands of
dollars to rescue those two whales trapped
in the Arctic ice. Why look at all the people
trapped in jobs they dont like.

RED HERRING

Can you name this Fallacy?

2) You support capital punishment just
because you want an eye for an eye, but
I have several good reasons to believe that
capital punishment is fundamentally
wrong

STRAW MAN

Can you name this Fallacy?

3) I'm positive that my work will meet your
requirements. I really need the job since
my grandmother is sick.

APPEAL TO PITY

Can you name this Fallacy?

4)
James said that he saw a picture of a
beautiful girl stashed in Stephens locker.
We can only conclude that Stephen has
broken the rules, because girls are not
allowed in the locker room.

Amphiboly

Can you name this Fallacy?

5)
All men are mortal. Therefore, some
day man will disappear from the earth.

Composition

Can you name this Fallacy?

6)

Animals and humans are similar in

many ways. Both experience sensations,
desires, fears, pleasures, and pains.
Humans have a right not to be subjected
to needless pain.
Does it not follow that animals have a
right not to be subjected to needless pain?

No Fallacy

Can you name this Fallacy?

7)
The position open in the accounting
department should be given to Frank
Frank has six hungry children to feed, and
his wife desperately needs an operation to
save her eyesight.

Appeal to Pity

Brain Teaser
Five men who are buddies in the last war are having reunion. They are
White, Brown, Peters, Harpen and Nash, who by occupation are painter,
writer, and barber,
neurologist and heating contractor. By coincidence, they live in the cities
of White
Plains, Brownville, PeterBurg, HarpersFerry and NashVille, but no man
live in the
city having a name similar to his, no does the name of his occupation
aThethe
barber
doesnt
in the
PeterBurgs
andof
Browns
neither
have
same
initiallive
as his
name
or the name
the cityiswhich
healives.
heating
The following facts are known:
constructor nor a painter nor does he live in PeterBurg or Harpers Ferry.
b- Mr. Harper lives in NashVille and is neither barber nor writer
c- White is not a resident of BrownsVille, nor is Nash, who is not a barber
or a
heating contractor. With only the information given, determine the name
of
the city in which Nash resides?