Unit 5 Flashcards Preview

Critical Thinking (PHIL252) > Unit 5 > Flashcards

Flashcards in Unit 5 Deck (27)
Loading flashcards...

Describe "False Dilemma" fallacy.

False Dilemma falacy involves an argument in the form of Disjunctinve pattern - "either ... or ..." that presents two alternatives as the only possible ones in the premise. In reality, there are more alternatives possible for that specific argument. Thus, such premise is false and the argument unsound.


What type of fallacy is this: "Either we legalize drugs or we keep building new prisons and filling them with drug offenders"?

False Dilemma. There are more alternatives possible than the ones presented.


Describe "Slippery Slope" fallacy.

Slippery Slope fallacy argues that a circumstance will arise from a certain action. In reality that circumstance is very unlikely to arise from that particular action. In Slippery Slope, the person argues that *if* something happens *then* something else will happen.


What type of fallacy is this: "We cannot unlock our child from the closet because if we do, she will want to roam the house. If we let her roam the house, she will want to roam the neighborhood. If she roams the neighborhood, she will get picked up by a stranger in a van, who will sell her in a sex slavery ring in some other country. Therefore, we should keep her locked up in the closet."

Slippery Slope.
While it is likely that the child will want to roam the house and maybe go out to the street. It is highly improbable that the child will be picked up by a stranger in a van to be sold to slavery.


Describe "Sraw Man" logical fallacy.

In "Straw Man" logical fallacy the opponent first wrongfully assigns the weaker and innacurate (and often such that was never presented by the opponent) argument to the opponent and secondly presents his/her argument as the only alternative to the opponent's (effectively using False Dilemma fallacy as there are usually more alternatives).


What type of fallacy is this:
Person 1: What is your view on the Christian God?
Person 2: I don’t believe in any gods, including the Christian one.
Person 1: So you think that we are here by accident, and all this design in nature is pure chance, and the universe just created itself?

This is a Sraw Man fallacy.
Person 1 wrongfully assigns the view that we are here by accident etc to Person 2 (who never said that). Person 1 also implies that Person 1 view on this topic is wrong and Person's 2 opinion is correct.


What type of fallacy is this:
Our senator opposes an agreement to limit carbon emmissions. He must think that climate change poses absolutely no serious threat.

This is a Sraw Man fallacy.
The senator does oppose an agreement but he does not necessarily think that the climate change poses no threat. It is just a speakers attempt to "make a straw man" and then topple it.


Describe "Affirming the Consequent" fallacy

"Affirming the Consequent" fallacy is the argument with the following template:

(1) If A then B
(2) B
(C) Therefore, A.

It resembles Modus Ponens but is fallacious.


What kind of fallacy is this:
"If the government does its job properly then the poverty rate would go down. The poverty rate does go down. The government does its job properly."

This is "Affirming the Consequent" fallacy.


Describe "Denying the Antecedent" fallacy.

"Denying the Antecedent" fallacy is the argument that follows the pattern:

(1) If A then B
(2) not A
(C) Therefore, not B

It resembles Modus Tollens but is fallacious.


What fallacy is this:
"If she loves you she will marry you. She does not love you. She will not marry you."

This is "Denying the Antecedent" fallacy.


Describe "Equviocation" fallacy.

In "Equivocation" fallacy the same terms used in premises or the conclusion take on different meaning. This is also called "the expression that shifts meaning".


What fallacy is this:
"The priest told me I should have faith.
I have faith that my son will do well in school this year.
Therefore, the priest should be happy with me."

This is "Equivocation" fallacy. The term faith shifts meanings between two premises. In one it means belief in the higher powers. In second it means confidence.


Describe "Begging the Question" (petitio principii) fallacy.

Technicaly, "Begging the Question" fallacy satisfies the requirement of validity for the argument. Often, this argument follows the pattern:

(1) A
(C) A

Such argument does not provide more reasons to believe the conclusion and simply restates the premise. It is, therefore is guilty of begging the question.


What fallacy is this:
"The reason everyone wants the new "Silly Elmo" doll is because this is the hottest toy of the season"

This is "Begging the Question (petitio principii)" fallacy. The conclusion "Everyone wants the new toy" is simply a paraphrasing of "this is the hottest toy of the season."


Describe "Appeal to Force(ad baculum)" fallacy.

In "Appeal to Force" fallacy the arguer tries to persuade you indicating that you will be harmed if you do not agree.


What fallacy is this:
"If you want to keep working here you should reconsider your criticism of the company policies"

This is "Appeal to Force(ad baculum)" fallacy.


Describe "Appeal to Pity (ad misericordiam)" fallacy.

In "Appeal to Pity" fallacy the arguer tries to persuade you on the premise that you will be causing harm to her\him or others if you do not agree.


What fallacy is this:
"I am qualified. I have some experience and I really need the money so you should hire me."

This is "Appeal to Pity (ad misericordiam)" fallacy.


Describe "Prejudicial Language" fallacy.

In "Prejudicial Language" fallacy the arguer uses negative or positive language to bias you for or against a certain point of view without giving you the reasons to do so.


What fallacy is this:
"If you want to join that group of people that believe that backwards theory of human evolution I feel sorry for you."

This is "Prejudicial Language" fallacy.


Describe "Appeal to Authority (ad verecundiam)" fallacy.

In "Appeal to Authority" fallacy, an expert whose expertise and prominence is irrelevant to the argument is appealed to. This fallacy is in contrast to legitimate appeal to authority that is a proper argument method.


What fallacy is this:
"A majority of doctors think that morality of young people has declined."

This is "Appeal to Authority (ad verecundiam)" fallacy.


Describe "Attacking the Person" (ad hominem) fallacy.

In "Attacking the Person" fallacy, a person is attacked (on different grounds: a person's previous lying etc.) rather than the view that he or she holds. This fallacy is in contrast to legitimate "attacking the person" on different grounds.


What fallacy is this:
"Most of the people who want drugs legalized are closet users."

This is "Attacking the Person (ad hominem)" fallacy.


What are 3 criteria for when "Appeal to Authority (ad verecundiam)" fallacy is committed?

1. When the expert's opinion on the area outside of his expertise is cited.
2. When the authorities disagree about the issue and the authority is cited on only one side of the issue.
3. When the authority has an interest in the outcome of the argument and his opinion is used without giving the independent evidence.


What are 3 criteria for when "Attacking the Person (ad hominem)" fallacy is committed?

1. The person, rather than his views are attacked.
2. There IS a way of assessing the person's reasons UNLESS
3. The attack is on the grounds that are irrelevant to the point in questions, such as race, gender etc.