Logical Fallacies Packet 1
Argumentum Ad Populum“Argument toward the people”
(Appeal to popularity)
Appealing to irrational fears and prejudices in order
to prevent audiences from squarely facing the issue.
The basic idea is that a claim is accepted as being
true simply because most people are favorably
inclined towards the claim.
Since most humans tend to conform with the views
of the majority, convincing a person that the majority
approves of a claim is often an effective way to get
him to accept it. This is similar to bandwagon and to
an appeal to emotion.
Takes the form: Most people approve of X (have
favorable emotions towards X). Therefore X is true.
Examples
1.
"My fellow Americans...there has been some talk that
the government is overstepping its bounds by allowing
police to enter peoples' homes without the warrants
traditionally required by the Constitution. However,
these are dangerous times and dangerous times require
appropriate actions. I have in my office thousands of
letters from people who let me know, in no uncertain
terms, that they heartily endorse the war against crime
in these United States. Because of this overwhelming
approval, it is evident that the police are doing the right
thing."
2.
(nizcor.org)
"I read the other day that most people really like the
new gun control laws. I was sort of suspicious of them,
but I guess if most people like them, then they must be
okay." (nizcor.org)
The Red Herring Fallacy
What is a “red herring” fallacy?
 A Red Herring is a fallacy in which an irrelevant topic is presented in order
to divert attention from the original issue. The basic idea is to "win" an
argument by leading attention away from the argument and to another topic.
This sort of "reasoning" has the following form:
1) Topic A is under discussion.
2) Topic B is introduced under the guise of being relevant to topic A
(when topic B is actually not relevant to topic A).
3) Topic A is abandoned.
 This sort of "reasoning" is fallacious because merely changing the topic of
discussion hardly counts as an argument against a claim.
 This is the most general fallacy of irrelevance. Any argument in which the
premises are logically unrelated to the conclusion commits this fallacy.
Why is this type of fallacy referred to as red herring?
 The name of this fallacy comes from the sport of fox hunting in which a
dried, smoked herring, which is red in color, is dragged across the trail of the
fox to throw the hounds off the scent.
Examples of Red Herring:
 "We admit that this measure is popular. But we also urge you to note that
there are so many bond issues on this ballot that the whole thing is getting
ridiculous."
 "I think there is great merit in making the requirements stricter for the
graduate students. I recommend that you support it, too. After all, we are in a
budget crisis and we do not want our salaries affected."
 "You know, I've begun to think that there is some merit in the Republican's
tax cut plan. I suggest that you come up with something like it, because if we
Democrats are going to survive as a party, we have got to show that we are
as tough-minded as the Republicans, since that is what the public wants."
 "Grading this exam on a curve would be the most fair thing to do. After all,
classes go more smoothly when the students and the professor are getting
along well."
http://www.unc.edu/depts/wcweb/handouts/fallacies.html
http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/red-herring.html
Logical Fallacy: Straw Man
The Straw Man is a type of logical fallacy in which the arguer is attempting to refute his
opponent's position by a substituting a distorted, exaggerated or misrepresented version of the
position (to make it appear weaker). The arguer attacks the "straw man" and argues to a
conclusion that denies the "straw man" he has set up without touching the opponent’s actual
argument.
1.
2.
3.
4.
Person A has position X.
Person B presents position Y (which is a distorted version of X).
Person B attacks position Y.
Therefore X is false/incorrect/flawed.
Example 1:
"Senator Jones says that we should not fund the attack submarine program. I disagree
entirely. I can't understand why he wants to leave us defenseless like that."
Example 2:
Person A: We should liberalize the laws on beer.
Person B: No, any society with unrestricted access to intoxicants loses its work ethic
and goes only for immediate gratification.
Example 3:
Jill: "We should clean out the closets. They are getting a bit messy."
Bill: "Why, we just went through those closets last year. Do we have to clean them out
everyday?"
http://www.fallacyfiles.org/strawman.html
http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/straw-man.html
Begging the question is also known as circular reasoning. Begging the Question is
a fallacy in which the premises include the claim that the conclusion is true or
(directly or indirectly) assume that the conclusion is true. This sort of "reasoning"
typically has the following form.
1. Premises in which the truth of the conclusion is claimed or the truth of the
conclusion is assumed (either directly or indirectly).
2. Claim C (the conclusion) is true.
This sort of "reasoning" is fallacious because simply assuming that the conclusion
is true (directly or indirectly) in the premises does not constitute evidence for that
conclusion. Obviously, simply assuming a claim is true does not serve as evidence
for that claim. This is especially clear in particularly blatant cases: "X is true. The
evidence for this claim is that X is true."
Some cases of question begging are fairly blatant, while others can be extremely
subtle.
http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/begging-the-question.html
Examples:
1. You should drive on the right side of the road because that is what the law
says, and the law is the law.
http://atheism.about.com/od/logicalfallacies/a/beggingquestion.htm
2. It says in the Bible that God exists. Since the Bible is God’s word, and God
never speaks falsely, then everything in the Bible must be true. So, God
must exist.
http://atheism.about.com/od/logicalfallacies/a/beggingquestion_2.htm
3. Murder is morally wrong. Therefore, abortion is morally wrong.
http://atheism.about.com/od/logicalfallacies/a/beggingquestion_3.htm
Argument Ad Misericordium (also spelled
Misericordiam) - Appeal to Pity, Appeal to
Misery, Emotional Appeal
Red Herring - Fallacy of Irrelevance
Argument ad Misericordium is generally used to
distract from the argument at hand.
Oftentimes, an emotional appeal is put in
place when there is a lack of factual
evidence.
Many times, it is completely
irrelevant and does not help the argument.
Argument ad misericordium can be used in a
non-fallacious way. For instance, it can be
used to provide relief from some sort of
disaster.
It may also fit in other
situations, but it really depends on what is
being argued.
Argument ad Misericordium generally takes this form:
Person L argues statement p or argument A.
L deserves pity because of circumstance y.
Circumstance y is irrelevant to p or A.
Statement p is true or argument A is good.
Examples:
Oh, Officer, There's no reason to give me a traffic ticket
for going too fast because I was just on my way to the
hospital to see my wife who is in serious condition to tell
her I just lost my job and the car will be repossessed.
Members of Congress can surely see in their hearts that
they need to vote in favor of passage of the Gun Bill
allowing concealed weapons because their constituents who
lobby for liberalizing firearms will be greatly saddened
if they do not do so.
Where is the logical fallacy?
Public Schools, K through 12, need to have much easier
exams for students because teachers don't fully realize
the extent of the emotional repercussions of the sorrow
and depression of the many students who could score much
better on easier exams.
Sources:
Fallacyfiles.org
http://www.fallacyfiles.org/examples.html
Philosiphy.lander.edu
http://philosophy.lander.edu/logic/misery.html
Argumentum ad ignorantiam:
By Vedant Kumar (R1)
“a logical fallacy in which it is claimed that a premise is true
only because it has not been proven false, or is false only because it
has not been proven true*.”
* It is often futile to establish the burden of proof (onus probandi) in arguments from ignorance.
Basic Examples:
1. God exists because you cannot prove it does not.
2. God does not exist because you cannot prove that it does.
3. Alice: This is a waste of time. Bob: This isn't a waste of time.
Alice: How is it not a waste of time? Silly Bob...
Visual Examples (try the other two!):
Tea-bagger: Obama's a fascist.
Bob: Actually, he's not a fascist at all.
Tea-bagger: Can't fool me. He's a fascist.
Appeal to Misleading/ False
Authority
 Another name for this type of fallacy is
Argumentum ad Verecundiam meaning
argument from respect or modesty
 This is a fallacy in which the author uses a quote
or an opinion from a person to make the
audience believe a certain thing is true.
 The form that this fallacy takes is normally
Authority A believes that S is true. Therefore S
is true.
 This fallacy can be misused in five major ways:
1. Used in an inappropriate situation- if there
isn’t an expert on the subject you are writing
about, DO NOT make one up. Also if a question
can be answered with facts and direct answers,
use those. Expert opinions are not as reliable as
direct evidence.
Example 1: John Doe says, “Lemons taste better
than apples?” How can he say this when the subject
is obviously one based on personal preference?
There is no expert on this subject.
Example 2: According to the Kentucky Department
of Motor Vehicles, the legal age to obtain a permit is
16. All of this is unnecessary. Just say the legal age
to obtain a permit is 16 in the state of Kentucky
2. False expert- sometimes an argument may
contain an opinion from a person who is not an
expert on the subject.
Example: Paris Hilton says, “Crest toothpaste makes
your teeth whiter than Colgate.” How would she
know this when she is not a dentist? This is a false
expert opinion.
3. Using an expert who is biased- if the person you
are quoting strongly believes in one side of the
argument, his or her opinion is unreliable.
Example 1: Michael Jordan says, “Everybody should
buy Jordans. They’re the best and most comfortable
shoes ever made.” Well of course Michael Jordan is
going to endorse his own shoe. Therefore, this is an
unreliable expert opinion.
4. When the person cited is an expert, but not an
expert on that particular subject- if the person you
are quoting is known for something, but doesn’t
have any knowledge on your subject
Example 1: Albert Einstein says, “The newest
fashion trends in Paris are very creative and are
derived from the 80s.” Albert Einstein may be an
expert when it comes to physics, but not when it
comes to fashion.
5. Not naming the expert- without the expert’s
name, your quote is pointless and meaningless.
Example 1: According to a spokesperson from the
Sean John clothing store, “The new line is going to
contain more classy and elegant clothing.” Who is
this spokesperson and what power does he have to
say this? This “spokesperson” could be a janitor in
the building.
Other Examples
Renault…says pedestrian safety takes a high
priority, but that it has chosen not to make its cars
safer for pedestrians because of uncertainties over a
forthcoming European Pedestrian Safety Directive.
"We are waiting to find out which direction the EU
wants to go in," a spokesman says.
 Does not include the name of the spokesman.
Therefore, this is an appeal to misleading
authority.
"Famous physicist John Taylor studied Uri Geller
extensively and found no evidence of trickery or
fraud in his feats."
 Uri Geller is a stage magician. Therefore, John
Taylor isn’t qualified to evaluate his stage
magic.
Noted psychologist Elaine Johnson recommends that
you buy the EZ-Rest Hot Tub.
 She is not an expert on hot tubs. Therefore, she
is not qualified to make this recommendation.
Works Cited
http://www.fallacyfiles.org/authorit.html
http://www.don-lindsay-archive.org/
skeptic/arguments.html#authority
http://www.goodart.org/aa.htm
Definition: an argument which links the validity of a premise to an
irrelevant characteristic or belief of the person advocating the premise.
(Latin: "argument toward the person" or "argument against the person")
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem ^
Informal Structure of ad Hominem:
Person L says argument A.
Person L's circumstance or character is not satisfactory.
Argument A is not a good argument.
EX: A prosecutor asks the judge to not admit the testimony of a burglar
because burglars are not trustworthy.
http://philosophy.lander.edu/logic/person.html ^
Argumentum ad hominem abusive: insulting or belittling one’s
opponent. Pointing out character flaws or actions.
EX: "You can't believe Jack when he says God exists. He doesn't even
have a job."
Ad Hominem Circumstantial: constitutes an attack on the bias of a
source
EX: after one shares a testimony… one says,” Well, he would [say that],
wouldn't he?"
Ad Hominem tu quoque: the source making the argument has spoken
or acted in a way inconsistent with the argument
EX: "He cannot accuse me of libel because he was just successfully
sued for libel."
http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/appeal-toauthority.html
The fallacy of phrasing a question that, by the way it is worded, assumes
something not contextually granted, assumes something not true, or assumes a
false dichotomy.
EXAMPLES
1. "What church do you and your husband attend?"
2. Are you still a heavy drinker?
3.
Dicto Simpliciter Definition: This is the fallacy of making a sweeping statement and expecting it to
be true of every specific case -- in other words, stereotyping.
http://www.csun.edu/~dgw61315/fallacies.html#Dicto%20simpliciter
Explanation: This logical fallacy concerns applying a general rule or statistic to individual
situations where it does not hold.
Women are on average not as strong as men and less able to carry a gun. Therefore women can't
pull their weight in a military unit.
http://www.csun.edu/~dgw61315/fallacies.html#Dicto%20simpliciter
Birds normally can fly.
Tweety the Penguin is a bird.
Therefore, Tweety can fly.
http://www.fallacyfiles.org/accident.html
http://i428.photobucket.com/albums/qq5/robertoderichmond/internettoughguy.jpg
Guilt by Association
 Guilt by Association is the attempt to discredit an idea based upon
disfavored people or groups associated with it.
 It is clear that sort of "reasoning" is fallacious. For example the following is
obviously a case of poor "reasoning": "You think that 1+1=2. But, Adolf
Hitler, Charles Manson, Joseph Stalin, and Ted Bundy all believed that
1+1=2. So, you shouldn't believe it."
 The fallacy draws its power from the fact that people do not like to be
associated with people they dislike. Hence, if it is shown that a person shares
a belief with people he dislikes he might be influenced into rejecting that
belief. In such cases the person will be rejecting the claim based on how he
thinks or feels about the people who hold it and because he does not want to
be associated with such people.
http://fallacyfiles.org/guiltbya.html
http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/guilt-by-association.html
Example 1
Will and Kiteena are arguing over socialism. Kiteena is a pacifist and hates
violence and violent people.
Kiteena: "I think that the United States should continue to adopt socialist
programs. For example, I think that the government should take control of vital
industries."
Will: "So, you are for state ownership of industry."
Kiteena: "Certainly. It is a great idea and will help make the world a less violent
place."
Will: "Well, you know Stalin also endorsed state ownership on industry. At last
count he wiped out millions of his own people. Pol Pot of Cambodia was also for
state ownership of industry. He also killed millions of his own people. The
leadership of China is for state owned industry. They killed their own people in
that square. So, are you still for state ownership of industry?"
Kiteena: "Oh, no! I don't want to be associated with those butchers!"
http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/guilt-by-association.html
Example 2
Jen and Sandy are discussing the topic of welfare. Jen is fairly conservative
politically but she has been an active opponent of racism. Sandy is extremely
liberal politically.
Jen: "I was reading over some private studies of welfare and I think it would be
better to have people work for their welfare. For example, people could pick up
trash, put up signs, and maybe even do skilled labor that they are qualified for.
This would probably make people feel better about themselves and it would get
more out of our tax money."
Sandy: "I see. So, you want to have the poor people out on the streets picking up
trash for their checks? Well, you know that is exactly the position David Count
endorses."
Jen: "Who is he?"
Sandy: "I'm surprised you don't know him, seeing how alike you two are. He was a
Grand Mooky Wizard for the Aryan Pure White League and is well known for his
hatred of blacks and other minorities. With your views, you'd fit right in to his little
racist club."
Jen: "So, I should reject my view just because I share it with some racist?"
Sandy: "Of course."
http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/guilt-by-association.html
Example 3
The most telling moment in last night's [State of the Union] speech came after the
president noted that "key provisions of the Patriot Act are set to expire next year."
In response, notes the New York Times, "some critics in Congress applauded
enthusiastically." If Osama bin Laden watched the speech, one imagines him
applauding too.
http://fallacyfiles.org/guiltbya.html
http://grammar.about.com/od/c/g/complqueterm.htm
http://philosophy.lander.edu/logic/complex.html
Dicto Simpliciter – The generalization. Dicto Simpliciter occurs when one takes a statement that is true
some-to-most of the time and presumes it to be true in all cases. It takes the form of
All X can/is usually/mostly Y
All A is X (where A can't/isn't Y)
Ergo, all A is Y
Examples/Quiz:
Which of the following doesn't belong?
Example 1
All birds can normally fly
This penguin is a bird
Therefore, this penguin can fly
Example 2
All MST students are smart
Rodney is an MST student
Therefore, Rodney is smart.
Example 3
All cars run on gasoline
The Batmobile is a car
Therefore, the Batmobile runs on gasoline
Example 4
All women are inferior to men
All people inferior to me should make men sandwiches
Therefore, women should make men sandwiches
Labored Hypothesis (Occam’s Razor)
Occam’s Razor is the scientific principle that the simplest of any given hypotheses is likely to be
the right one.
Ignoring all of the most reasonable explanations. This makes the desired explanation into the only one.
When you’re trying to draw conclusion, it’s best to make as few assumptions as possible. In other word,
use data to draw conclusion, not speculation.
Fallacy Ex: You don’t keep up on your homework and start a paper the night before it’s due. When it’s
returned to you it has a C- grade. You conclude the grade reflects the teacher’s ignorance or personal
dislike for you.
Occam’s Razor: The paper was poorly written.
Fallacy Ex: You are thinking of your best friend, Rufus, when the phone rings and it’s Rufus! You
conclude the two of you are magically connected.
Occam’s Razor: Random Coincidence. You think of your best friend dozens if not hundreds of
times a day; he calls you a couple times a day. The odds of him calling you once or twice a day
at least once in awhile are pretty good.
http://www.class.uidaho.edu/eng207td/Logic%20and%20Analysis/most_common_logical_fallacies.htm
Faulty Causal Generalization
Latin Name: Non Causa Pro Causa
Translation: “Non-cause for cause”
Definition: This is fallacy is when you make any false assumption about causality. The
assumption can be based on the events happening in sequence, at the same time, or being
somewhat correlated.
General Form:
A happened, B happened afterwards
Therefore, A caused B
A and B happened at the same time
Therefore, A caused B
B is related to A
Therefore, A caused B
How to Avoid It: Unless you have evidence or research that shows definite causation, stick with
saying that two events are correlated.
Examples:
Charging that welfare causes child poverty, [Gary Bauer] cites a study showing that "the highest increases
in the rate of child poverty in recent years have occurred in those states which pay the highest welfare
benefits. The lowest increases—or actual decreases—in child poverty have occurred in states which
restrain the level of AFDC payments."
"The abortionists have got to bear some burden for this because God will not be mocked. And when we
destroy 40 million little innocent babies, we make God mad. I really believe that the pagans, and the
abortionists, and the feminists, and the gays and the lesbians who are actively trying to make that an
alternative lifestyle, the ACLU, People for the American Way -- all of them who have tried to secularize
America -- I point the finger in their face and say 'you helped this happen.'" --on the 9/11 attacks - Jerry
Falwell
…[E]vidence shows that even state and local handgun control laws work. For example, in 1974
Massachusetts passed the Bartley-Fox Law, which requires a special license to carry a handgun outside
the home or business. The law is supported by a mandatory prison sentence. Studies by Glenn Pierce and
William Bowers of Northeastern University documented that after the law was passed handgun homicides
in Massachusetts fell 50% and the number of armed robberies dropped 35%.
URL : http://www.fallacyfiles.org/cumhocfa.html#Context
http://philosophy.lander.edu/logic/cause.html
Either/or Fallacy
-This fallacy occurs when a speaker or
writer presents the audience with two false
choices: "Either this or that."
-used to force the audience to accept a
conclusion by presenting only two possible
options, one of which is clearly more
desirable, when in truth there are three or
more options
-designed to draw in an audience who isn’t
well informed on a given topic
-a writer uses this to make their idea look
better when compared to an even worse
one
Example
A mother may tell her child: “Eat your
broccoli or you won’t get desert.”
-this gives the child only two choices.
Either they eat their broccoli and get
dessert, or they don’t eat their broccoli and
get no dessert. This allows the mother to
make her view more desirable by grouping
the concept of eating broccoli with getting
dessert—what the child really wants.
http://ksuweb.kennesaw.edu/~shagin/logfal-pbc-eitheror.htm
http://www.clt.astate.edu/composition/fallacies.htm
Example
George W. Bush once said “Either you’re with us, or
against us.” This is an example of an either/or
fallacy because it gives the audience only two
options when really there are more than just these.
If someone were ‘against’ America they would seem
unpatriotic, so it makes being ‘with’ America the
more desirable option.
Example
This is an example of the either/or fallacy because it again
presents the audience with only two options. The use of the
words “problem” and “solution” make one choice more desirable.
Most people don’t want to be a problem and would rather be
proactive and be a part of the solution.
Genetic Fallacy
The genetic fallacy is committed when an idea is either accepted or rejected because of its source, rather
than its merit.
Even from bad things, good may come; we therefore ought not to reject an idea just because of where it
comes from, as adhominem arguments do.
Equally, even good sources may sometimes produce bad results; accepting an idea because of the
goodness of its source, as in appeals to authority, is therefore no better than rejecting an idea because of
the badness of its source. Both types of argument are fallacious.
Examples
(1) My mommy told me that the tooth fairy is real.
Therefore:
(2) The tooth fairy is real.
(1) Eugenics was pioneered in Germany during the war.
Therefore:
(2) Eugenics is a bad thing.
Taken From: http://www.logicalfallacies.info/relevance/genetic/
Irrelevant Appeals
Explanation
Irrelevant appeals attempt to sway the listener with information that, though persuasive,
is irrelevant to the matter at hand. There are many different types of irrelevant appeal.
Forms
Appeal to authority seeks to persuade by citing what someone else, a perceived
authority, thinks on the subject, as if that resolves the question. The degree of support that such
an appeal lends to a claim varies depending on the particular authority in question, the
relevance of their expertise to the claim, and other factors, but in all cases is limited.
Appeal to consequences seeks to persuade by getting the listener to consider either
the attractiveness of a belief, or the unattractiveness of the alternatives.
Appeal to pity, which can be very effective, persuades using emotion—specifically,
sympathy—rather than reason.
Appeal to tradition is a fallacy that occurs when it is assumed that something is better or
correct simply because it is older, traditional, or "always has been done."
Example #1
“So I shamelessly say no, I want him to fail, if his agenda is a
far-left collectivism, some people say socialism, as a conservative
heartfelt, deeply, why would I want socialism to succeed?”
– Rush Limbaugh in an interview with
Sean Hannity, January 21, 2009
Example #2
The Facts about Harvey Milk
1. Harvey Milk was a sexual predator of teenagers
2. Milk advocated having multiple sexual relationships at the
same time
3. Milk promoted lying to get ahead.
So, under "Harvey Milk Gay Day," elementary and secondary schoolchildren could be
taught adult-child homosexual "sex" is OK, having multiple sexual relationships at the
same time is OK, and telling a very public lie is OK if it "gets you ahead." This
instruction, whether taught directly or indirectly, is very bad.
Nine days prior to Milk’s death, more than 900 followers of Jim Jones—many of them
campaign workers for Milk—perished in the most ghastly set of murder-suicides in
modern history. Before the congregants of the Peoples Temple drank Jim Jones’s
deadly Kool-Aid, Harvey Milk and much of San Francisco’s ruling class had already
figuratively imbibed. Milk occasionally spoke at Jones’s San Francisco–based
headquarters, promoted Jones through his newspaper columns, and defended the
Peoples Temple from its growing legion of critics. Jones provided conscripted
“volunteers” for Milk’s campaigns to distribute leaflets by the tens of thousands. Milk
returned the favor by abusing his position of public trust on behalf of Jones’s criminal
endeavors.
(http://rescueyourchild.com/SB_572.html)
Example #3
(Taken at the Tea Party in Washington D.C. on September 12, 2009)
Non Sequitur
2. means “it does not follow” in Latin
3. a conclusion that doesn't logically follow the previous statement
Examples:
1. This war is righteous because we are French.
2. You will do what I say because you are my wife.
3. Tens of thousands of Americans have seen lights in the night sky which they could not
identify. The existence of life on other planets is fast becoming certainty!
f
http://www.don-lindsay-archive.org/skeptic/arguments.html#sequitur
http://grammar.about.com/od/mo/g/nonseqterm.htm
Equivocation
By LexieWiegel
(Double Speak)- an ambiguous fallacy caused by the
double meaning of a word.
(http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/equivocation)
Equivocation is an ambiguous fallacy that occurs when a
phrase is ambiguous. The equivocation itself isn’t
fallacious, but the argument it makes is.
(http://www.fallacyfiles.org/equivoqu.html)
Examples
1. An excerpt from “Who’s on First” by Abbott and
Costello (http://www.abbottandcostello.net/who.htm):
Abbott: Goofe’ Dean, oh I see! Well let’s see, we have on the bags, we
have Who’s on first, What’s on second, and I Don’t Know is on third.
Costello: That’s what I want to find out.
Abbott: I say, Who’s on first, What’s on second, and I Don’t Know’s on
third.
Costello: Are you the manager?
Abbott: Yes.
Costello: You going to be the coach too?
Abbott: Yes.
Costello: And you don’t know the fellow’s names?
Abbott: Well I should.
Costello: Well then who is on first?
Abbott: Yes.
Costello: I mean the fellow’s name.
Abbott: Who.
Costello: The guy on first.
Abbott: Who.
Costello: The first baseman.
Abbott: Who!
Costello: The guy playing first base.
Abbott: Who is on first.
Costello: I’m asking you who’s on first!
Abbott: That’s the man’s name.
Costello: That’s whose name?
Abbott: Yeah.
Costello: Well go ahead and tell me.
Abbott: That’s it.
Costello: That’s who?
Abbott: Yeah.
This is considered an equivocation because it has many
ambiguous words. Abbott and Costello use ‘who’ as
someone’s name and as the actual use of the word as a
question. They go on to use ‘what’ and ‘I don’t know’ as
equivocation words. The whole excerpt becomes an
ambiguous fallacy.
2
(http://www.christianlogic.com/images/uploads/christianlogic_nunaandtoodles_20
03_equivocation.png)
This cartoon is an equivocation because the robber uses
an ambiguous word to trick the store owner. The owner
refers to stealing as physically taking something that isn’t
yours. The robber twists his words to make stealing seem
like the word used in baseball when you run to another
base while the pitcher has the ball. The robber says that
because stealing bases is ok, so is stealing things.
3.Here is an equivocation in the form of a syllogism
(http://faculty.uccb.ns.ca/philosophy/115/equivocation.htm):
Everything that runs has feet.
The river runs.
Therefore, the river has feet.
This is an example of equivocation because it uses ‘runs’
as the ambiguous word in the syllogism. It uses ‘runs’ to
mean the physical act of running, and how the water of a
river flows interchangeably. Although it is the same word,
it has two very different meanings.
Hypothesis Contrary to Fact
Julian Rippy
Definition- This fallacy consists of offering a poorly supported claim about what might have happened in
the past or future if circumstances or conditions were other than they actually were or are. The fallacy
also involves treating hypothetical situations as if they were fact.
Source: http://commfaculty.fullerton.edu/rgass/fallacy3211.htm
Example 1: "If I had only been there for him last night, he wouldn't have killed himself."
Source: http://bellsouthpwp.net/s/e/sean_c_rhoades/LogicalDebate/FallacyOfTheDay/Fallacy15.htm
Example 2: If Hitler had not invaded Russia and opened up two military fronts, the Nazis would surely
have won the war.
Source: http://commfaculty.fullerton.edu/rgass/fallacy3211.htm
Moralistic Fallacy: Concludes that things are, because they ought to be. (Opposite of naturalistic)

Because warfare is wrong and tragic, it cannot be part of human nature.

Since it is right to treat men and women as equals, the sexes must be biologically equal as well.

Since teachers shouldn’t stress out their students, Ms. Williams won’t give her students any
homework.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moralistic_fallacy
http://www.logicalfallacies.info/relevance/moralistic/
CARD STACKING (SPECIAL PLEADING)
Card stacking arises when certain evidence, generally numerical or statistical, is brought to our attention,
while other evidence, equally or even more pertinent, is suppressed or minimized.
(from packet)
Example 1:
(1) Flip-Flop #1: Bush has flip-flopped about whether capturing Osama Bin Laden is an important
priority for his administration.
(2) Bush flip-flopped on whether former Baathists could participate in the new Iraq government.
(3) Bush opposed the creation of an independent Sept. 11 commission, then supported it.
(4) Bush has waffled on whether to adopt the recommendations of the 9/11 Commission.
(5) Bush has flip-flopped on whether the War on Terrorism is winnable.
(6) Bush has flip-flopped on Yucca Mountain.
(7) Bush has attempted to have it both ways on assault weapons.
(8) In 2000, Bush argued against new military entanglements and nation building. He's done both in Iraq.
(9) Bush opposed the creation of a Homeland Security Department, then embraced it.
(10) Bush first refused to speak to the members of the 911 Commission, then agreed only if Vice
President Dick Cheney came with him and provided that their testimony was secret and not under oath.
http://www.50bushflipflops.com/Introduction/home.html
Example 2:
http://pol.moveon.org/archive/printads.html
Example 3:
- 11 January 2009 marks 7 years since the first detainees were transferred to Guantánamo.
- Nearly 800 detainees have been held in Guantánamo, the vast majority without charge or trial.
- Approximately 250 detainees were still held in December 2008. Nearly 100 of them were Yemenis.
- As of December 2008, 26 Guantánamo detainees had been charged for trial by military commission; 3
had been convicted and sentenced; charges against 6 had been dismissed (although they could be recharged); 6 were facing the death penalty
- By December 2008, approximately 520 detainees had been released from Guantánamo to other countries
since 2002, including Albania, Afghanistan, Australia, Bangladesh, Bahrain, Belgium, Denmark, Egypt,
France, Iran, Iraq, Jordan, Kuwait, Libya, Maldives, Mauritania, Morocco, Pakistan, Russia, Saudi
Arabia, Spain, Sweden, Sudan, Tajikistan, Turkey, Uganda, United Kingdom and Yemen.
- A majority of those detained are believed to be held in isolation in Camp 5, Camp 6 or Camp 7.
- Camp 6 was built to house 178 detainees. Detainees are confined for a minimum of 22 hours a day in
individual steel cells with no windows to the outside.
- At least 12 of those held at Guantánamo were under 18 years old when taken into custody. At least
three were still there in December 2008
- At least 4 men are reported to have died in Guantánamo as a result of suicide. Dozens more suicide
attempts have been reported.
- Detainees have been taken into custody in more than 10 countries before being transferred to
Guantánamo without any judicial process.
- An analysis of around 500 of the detainees concluded that only 5 per cent had been captured by US
forces; 86 per cent had been arrested by Pakistani or Afghanistan-based Northern Alliance forces and
turned over to US custody, often for a reward of thousands of US dollars.
- 14 detainees were transferred to Guantánamo in September 2006 after they had been held
incommunicado in secret CIA custody for up to 4 and a half years; 5 other men have been transferred to
Guantánamo since, at least two of them from secret CIA custody.
- An unknown number of people have been held in secret CIA custody. At least three dozen people
believed to have been held in secret remain unaccounted for, their fate and whereabouts unknown.
- Hundreds of people remain detained without charge, trial or judicial review of their detentions at the
US air base in Bagram, Afghanistan.
http://www.amnestyusa.org/document.php?id=ENGAMR511472008
Why is a raven like a
writing desk?
Because Poe
wrote on both!
What Makes an Analogy Faulty?

Untrue basis for the relationship of two
objects
"Doctors are allowed to look up “Bill Clinton has no experience of
difficult diagnoses in their medical serving in the military. To have Bill
textbooks, so students should be
able to look up tough test questions
Clinton become president, and thus
commander in chief of the armed forces
of the United States, is like electing
in their texts."
http://www.bcskeptics.info/resources/criticalthinking/hcf.faultyanal.html
some passer-by on the street to fly the
http://www.fallacyfiles.org/wanalogy.html
space shuttle”
http://ksuweb.kennesaw.edu/~shagin/logfal-analysis-falseanalogy.htm