Rhetoric, Rationalization, and
Bad Argument Strategies
Informal Fallacies and Non-arguments
Argument from Outrage
When anger functions as a premise
Argument from Outrage
When anger functions as a premise
May use selective presentation to attempt
to create, increase, or confirm feelings of
anger
Argument from Outrage
When anger functions as a premise
May use selective presentation to attempt
to create, increase, or confirm feelings of
anger
May attempt to justify letting anger over
one thing influence judgment about
another, unrelated thing
Argument from Outrage
When anger functions as a premise
May use selective presentation to attempt
to create, increase, or confirm feelings of
anger
May attempt to justify letting anger over
one thing influence judgment about
another, unrelated thing
May simplistically attempt to focus anger
on an easy target (scapegoating)
Dennis Miller on war with Iraq: “After 9/11, we had to do
something!”
Scare Tactics/Argument by Force
When fear functions as a premise
Scare Tactics/Argument by Force
When fear functions as a premise
May use selective presentation to attempt
to create, increase, or confirm feelings of
fear
Scare Tactics/Argument by Force
When fear functions as a premise
May use selective presentation to attempt
to create, increase, or confirm feelings of
fear
May attempt to justify letting fear of one
thing influence judgment about another,
unrelated thing
Scare Tactics/Argument by Force
When fear functions as a premise
May use selective presentation to attempt
to create, increase, or confirm feelings of
fear
May attempt to justify letting fear of one
thing influence judgment about another,
unrelated thing
Depends on inappropriate beliefs about
what is feared
To consider: Hostage Syndrome -- acceptance of captors’
beliefs by hostages
Argument from Pity
When sympathy functions as a premise
Argument from Pity
When sympathy functions as a premise
Occurs primarily as self-deception
Argument from Pity
When sympathy functions as a premise
Occurs primarily as self-deception
May make calculated demands on
feelings of sympathy and compassion
Argument from Pity
When sympathy functions as a premise
Occurs primarily as self-deception
May make calculated demands on
feelings of sympathy and compassion
May result in assumption of inadequately
justified obligations
Argument from Pity
When sympathy functions as a premise
Occurs primarily as self-deception
May make calculated demands on
feelings of sympathy and compassion
May result in assumption of inadequately
justified obligations
Can be mitigated by competent moral
reasoning
Argument from Envy
When jealousy motivates premises
Apple Polishing
When flattery motivates premises
Selection of premises may be influenced
by irrelevant feelings
 Unstated (assumed) premises are likely
Likely to occur as interior rationalization
Wishful Thinking
When hope or desire motivates premises
Wishful Thinking
When hope or desire motivates premises
Fallacy includes as a premise the belief
that thinking or wishing will change
probability
Wishful Thinking
When hope or desire motivates premises
Fallacy includes as a premise the belief
that thinking or wishing will change
probability
Key “wishful thinking” premise may
be an explicit metaphysical belief
Wishful Thinking
When hope or desire motivates premises
Fallacy includes as a premise the belief
that thinking or wishing will change
probability
Key “wishful thinking” premise may
be an explicit metaphysical belief
May occur as interior rationalization,
explanation of faith, or “cheerleading”
Peer Pressure/Group Think
When need for approval or belonging
motivates premises
Peer Pressure/Group Think
When need for approval or belonging
motivates premises
Claims accepted (function as true) because
the group wants them accepted
Peer Pressure/Group Think
When need for approval or belonging
motivates premises
Claims accepted (function as true) because
the group wants them accepted
 Known fact: people may change beliefs
or interpretations if they find themselves
in the minority, even in a group of
strangers
Peer Pressure/Group Think
When need for approval or belonging
motivates premises
Claims accepted (function as true) because
the group wants them accepted
 Known fact: people may change beliefs
or interpretations if they find themselves
in the minority, even in a group of
strangers
As nationalism, may be actively used to
discourage critical thinking
Rationalizing
When inauthentic premises are substituted
for true motives to justify a conclusion
Rationalizing
When inauthentic premises are substituted
for true motives to justify a conclusion
Misdirects attention from potentially
relevant facts or ideas
Rationalizing
When inauthentic premises are substituted
for true motives to justify a conclusion
Misdirects attention from potentially
relevant facts or ideas
 May constitute or result from selfdeception
Rationalizing
When inauthentic premises are substituted
for true motives to justify a conclusion
Misdirects attention from potentially
relevant facts or ideas
 May constitute or result from selfdeception
Substituted premises may also support
unintended conclusions
Argument from Popularity/
Tradition/Common Practice
When a widely-held belief that something
is true or right is deemed sufficient support
Argument from Popularity/
Tradition/Common Practice
When a widely-held belief that something
is true or right is deemed sufficient support
Evidence supporting the belief or behavior
is not accessible for evaluation
Argument from Popularity/
Tradition/Common Practice
When a widely-held belief that something
is true or right is deemed sufficient support
Evidence supporting the belief or behavior
is not accessible for evaluation
 Tends to gather strength with
repetition
Argument from Popularity/
Tradition/Common Practice
When a widely-held belief that something
is true or right is deemed sufficient support
Evidence supporting the belief or behavior
is not accessible for evaluation
 Tends to gather strength with
repetition
When group decisions have performative
power--as in most votes--what the group
thinks actually can make a proposition
Relativism/Subjectivism
When truth is reduced to perspective
Relativism/Subjectivism
When truth is reduced to perspective
Matters of fact and matters of opinion
must be treated differently
Relativism/Subjectivism
When truth is reduced to perspective
Matters of fact and matters of opinion
must be treated differently
Legitimate differences in perception must
be acknowledged
Relativism/Subjectivism
When truth is reduced to perspective
Matters of fact and matters of opinion
must be treated differently
Legitimate differences in perception must
be acknowledged
 Cultural variables and prerogatives
must be identified
Relativism/Subjectivism
When truth is reduced to perspective
Matters of fact and matters of opinion
must be treated differently
Legitimate differences in perception must
be acknowledged
 Cultural variables and prerogatives
must be identified
Moral and ethical values are obvious cases
in which preferences are decisive
Two Wrongs Fallacy
When wrong is taken for right
Two Wrongs Fallacy
When wrong is taken for right
Begins with A harming B, or even being
suspected of thinking harming B is OK
Two Wrongs Fallacy
When wrong is taken for right
Begins with A harming B, or even being
suspected of thinking harming B is OK
B decides to engage in wrongful behavior
just because A did or might
Two Wrongs Fallacy
When wrong is taken for right
Begins with A harming B, or even being
suspected of thinking harming B is OK
B decides to engage in wrongful behavior
just because A did or might
 B’s decision is simply reactive, and not
the outcome of reasoned inference
Red Herring/Smokescreen
When irrelevancies obscure relevant ones
Both tend to introduce material that the
audience will find attractive
Red Herring/Smokescreen
When irrelevancies obscure relevant ones
Both tend to introduce material that the
audience will find attractive
The red herring introduces distractions,
especially ones that share significant
features with the issue
Red Herring/Smokescreen
When irrelevancies obscure relevant ones
Both tend to introduce material that the
audience will find attractive
The red herring introduces distractions,
especially ones that share significant
features with the issue
The smokescreen introduces new topics
and complications that obscure the issue