Skip to main content

Logical Fallacies. What They Are and What to Do.

Logical Fallacies. What They Are and What to Do.

Argumentation is a technical term for trying to convince someone of a point of view or even a truth. Logical and emotional arguments are two principal ways to argue. Logical fallacies are those methods that pretend to be logical but are substantially flawed.  Formally then, we present a few of the more typical logical fallacies. We follow it up with tips that indicate what to look for when debating/arguing/conversing with a friend or opponent.

·        Ad hominem - attacking the person making the argument rather than the argument itself.

·        Straw man - misrepresenting the opponent's argument in order to make it easier to attack.

·        False dilemma - presenting two options as the only possible options, when in fact there are other options available.

·        Begging the question - assuming the truth of the conclusion in the premise of the argument.

·        Circular reasoning - using the conclusion of an argument as one of the premises of the argument.

·        Ad populum - appealing to the popularity of an idea as evidence for its truth. Also, pity.

·        Appeal to authority - citing an authority figure as evidence for the truth of an argument. Also, Correlation Is Not Causation.

·        Slippery Slope Fallacy - occurs when someone makes a claim about a series of events that would lead to one major event, usually a bad event.

·        Red Herring – irrelevant information is presented alongside relevant information, distracting attention from that relevant information.

Here are some tips that may help.

Tip #0. Listen very carefully. Don’t let fuzzy arguments sway you from genuine logic. Some will try. Let’s call this “blowing it past you.” Observe and note the fallacy used from the list above.

Tip #1, Be certain you are both using the same set of axioms, i.e. things you accept as true. Not close sets of axioms but identical sets of axioms. Know particularly well your own axioms.

Tip #2. Be aware of the “stretch.” Your opponent, says A implies B. Well, maybe A implies B’, but to go to B is a stretch of logic, as in just beyond logical - not quite there. Something like sleight of hand.

Tip #3. Is your opponent using “authority” to make conclusions? For example, one says that Bertrand Russell said that, and thus you must believe it. Authority is often a powerful argument, often used by religious and political persons, to end the discussion.

Tip #4. Stand your ground. One important counterargument is to say not he/she is wrong, but his/hers premises do not support the conclusion being made.

Tip #5. Look for contradictions made by your opponent. Eventually, they may trip themselves up by using conflicting, as in changing, bases for arguing.

Tip #6. Stay calm at all times. Emotion can sway you from logic to opinion, and you might not even notice it.

Tip #7. Don’t fall for your own logical fallacies. Your brain can trick you; it talks you into things not valid. 

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Human Simulation is Possible - by Humans

  Human Simulation: Agent-Based Modeling and the Computational Case for Our Reality   1.       Introduction In the essay, we introduce the notion that humanity could be a deliberate simulation based on an extremely simple single-celled organism, hardly anything more complex than that. This will allow an (apparently) new interpretation of the notion that humanity is simulated, but that there is no master engineer at a massive number of dials and switches, responsible for every twist and turn of our universe and lives. We begin with the notion that the universe exists and operates under its own laws. So, given the Earth [2] , when and where life first began, it was infused with a living agent, self-actualized, reproductive, and with other basic rules for its operations, interactions, and much of what single-celled organisms do today. The idea from this occurred some years back when writing code in ActionScript (formerly Flash), I was able to create...

The Calculus of Ideas and Patterns

  Introduction. When dealing with ideas, patterns, intuition, and brainstorming, we need operations or rules not unlike those of arithmetic. The goal is not proof, a finished device, or a fait accompli , but rather a foundation for further investigation and study. In some cases, these operations may yield a proposition, that is, something capable of being proved. In this sense, they form a practical logic of intuition. The article concludes with a few select examples from a variety of venues. Setting. We are working with a given idea, problem, or project, or simply just thinking. Our aim is to discover pathways, patterns, or conceptual connections that may be useful. The following operations describe ways in which ideas and patterns can be generated, transformed, or refined. These also work toward understanding the imagination. Yet, this framework is distinguished from formal logic and proof. We are tempted to call them as “soft logic” because while nothing is proved, reasons...

Freedom of Speech

  Think of freedom of speech as a living organism. Then think of what is required for it to survive. Coming to mind are a population agreeable to its constitution (its environment) and the institutions (its nutrients) that keep it healthy. Currently, many institutions, including some political parties, question unfettered freedom of speech and are working to deny it, claiming it is unhealthy for the body politic. Yes? No?