Fallacies of Relevance
 Tend to use the emotional rather than the rational part of reasoning.
 It couldn’t be notice immediately because these premises are often relevant for psychological
reasons, thus making the conclusion seems to be acceptable.
 It occurs when the premise has no significant relevant to the conclusion.
 Most of the Fallacies under this categories has a Latin name since these were discovered during
the middle age (Dark age).
 Argument from Ignorance
 (Argumentum Ad Ignorantiam)
 Occurs when the arguer assumes that the conclusions of a proposition is true because it has not
been proved false, or vice versa
 e.g. A criminally accused person is considered innocent if he is not proven guilty beyond
reasonable doubt.
 Used frequently in a debate as an argumentative tactic as well as a proposition of claims
 Appeal to Inappropriate Authority
 (Argumentum Ad Verecundiam)
 Occurs when the argument is based on the opinion of a person who has no authority to deliver
such opinion
 It may never be committed if the one who delivers such opinion is known for his expertise or
“authority” in the subject at hand
 Argumentum Ad Hominem
 Displays an attack which is directed against the personality rather than the reasoning of the
speaker
 “Argument against the man”
 Two kinds: abusive and circumstantial
 Abusive- involves the opponent physical appearance and personal qualities in order to distract
one’s opponent’s logical presentation of evidence.
 E.g. No doubt that hair stylist does not know hair styling. Just look at his hair
 Circumstantial- Attack is directed to the individual’s occupation, practices, actuation, education,
religion etc.
 You say I should consult a doctor, but you haven’t been visiting your personal physician for more
than a year.
 Appeal to Emotion
 (Argumentum Ad Populum)
 Occurs when the arguer tends to justify his claim through the general sentiment of the majority
 Three variations:
 Flag waving
 Snob appeal
 Bandwagoning
 Three variations:
 Flag waving
 The arguer reasoning’s reasoning is directed towards the nationalistic sentiment of the
people.
 A billion Americans cant be wrong
 Snob appeal
 It is a form tactic in which the arguer plays to be a little superior to, or better than
others.
 Use Axe cologne for men.. You will stand out in crowd . Axe cologne for man, stimulating
the sense of a woman.
 Bandwagoning
 It appeals to our feeling of wanting to be belong to the crowd.
 E.g. I really need to buy an iPhone 5. Besides, everybody else in our community has one
 Appeal to Pity
 (Argumentum Ad Misericordiam)
 Using emotion for the arguer tends to affect the sentiments of his/her listeners/readers through
sympathy
 Appeal to Force
 (Argumentum Ad Baculum)
 Also works as argumentum ad hominem in the sense that it attacks the arguer’s opponents
through force, or posing a threat
 ARGUMENT
 It is a set of statements in which a claim is made, support is offered for it, and there is an
attempt to influence someone in a context of argument.
 Vague Sentences (Too Vague)
 What does it means if a sentence is too vague?
 Vague – a characteristic of being unclear or indistinct in nature or character and is perceptible or
recognizable only in an indefinite way
 Vague sentence: Today’s technology is affecting people’s learning.
 Specific sentence: Today’s technology forces humans to improve their knowledge base through
continuing education.
 Drawing the Line
 It is committed when one rejects a vague claim because of its imprecision and inability to
establish a demarcation line on the edge of the concept
 Falls under the Fallacy of clarity which involves errors that depict vague or unclear meanings in
the argument.
 Bald Man Fallacy, Fallacy of the Heap and Sorites Fallacy
 Vagueness and Standards
 Subjective claim invokes personal standards (involves matters of pure opinion) while objective
claim invokes impersonal standards (involves factual matters)
 Applying the subjectivity and objectivity of moral claims requires meticulous thinking and
analysis of sentence construction.
 Ambiguous Sentences
 Involves fallacy of amphiboly
 It occurs when a sentence used in an argument has double/triple meaning
 An argument should convey a single meaning.
 Ambiguous Sentences
 Using pronouns and appropriate quotation marks
 Using pronouns is one of the ways of making the argument true/valid
 Using quotation marks can help eliminate ambiguity and vagueness in an argument
 Definitions
 Aside from identifying whether the arguer commits the fallacy of amphiboly or uses pronouns
and quotation marks, another way of avoiding such claim/argument to be ambiguous is by
clearly defining it.
 Definition explains how to use a word or phrase
 Main purpose of defining a term: to set working generalizations that will help control the
meaning and scope of important terms
 Ways on how to make a definition:
 by giving the synonyms of the word/phrase
 by describing the nature and characteristics of the word or phrase
 by explaining the word or phrase, and
 by describing it according to the speaker’s connotation or text
 Have you tried to rewrite someone else’s writing? If yes, was it easy or difficult?
 What style did you use to rewrite the original passage?
 PLAGARISM
 Refers to the unauthorized use of language and thoughts of an author and the representation of
them as one’s own.
 One of the effective way to avoid committing this act is to paraphrase the original passage and
properly cite the source.
 Punishable act under the Philippine law protecting the intellectual property rights.
 Argument Analysis
 Two common techniques that may help us analyse argumentative passages and clarify the
relations of premises and conclusions within them are:
 Paraphrasing – a retelling of information from a source in the note taker’s own words and
writing style
 Diagramming – main purpose is to present its structure by assigning a number that corresponds
to the premises and conclusion
 TIPS IN PARAPHRASING:
 Read and understand very well the original text.
 Do literal paraphrasing if there are difficult terminologies.
 Find synonyms for unfamiliar words (use context clues; use a dictionary and a thesaurus).
 Repeat key words.
 Do structural paraphrasing by varying the sentence patterns
 E.g. Original sentence: Technology can cause a disaster
 Altered sentence: A Technological disaster is possible.
 Change the order of ideas
 Break a long sentence into shorter one.
 Set aside the original text