Explaining Logical Fallacies

[Mathew Steel 151]

Ad Hominem

Yes, this is in fact considered a logical fallacy. Ad hominem, meaning "to the man" in Latin, is such a common fallacy, that it is even a break of the code of conduct for SHN. Simply put, ad hominem is to attack a person's character, background, appearance, instead of the argument or idea itself. This is where "to the man" is clear, as the response is directed at the "man", or person, themselves, and not the point of the discussion. Interestingly, the terms ad mulieriem?and ad feminam?were used when referencing this type of fallacy towards women. It is important to note that ad hominem is not only insulting a person. This would simply be an insult in that case. Ad hominem is a fallacy as it is an insult used as an argument or evidence towards one's motives.

 

 

Straw Man Fallacy

A straw-man fallacy is where one deconstructs, removes, and essentially downgrades a position or argument, in order to make it easier to attack. The analogy of the straw-man essentially suggests that by making one's argument nothing but a lifeless bundle of straw, it is easy to defeat. The term "Scarecrow fallacy" is sometimes used. These fallacies are deceitful, and are often unnoticed. Sentences such as "So you're saying..." are key to look for, as straw-man fallacies often begin in such a way.

 

 

Black and White Fallacy

Often referred to as a false dilemma, is a line of reasoning in which the conclusions to a position are intentionally limited. Usually, these are limited to two conclusions, hence the use of "black and white", but can be very high in number. The point of this fallacy is that the conclusions or options are oversimplified in order to weaken them. This is often seen in fighting talk, "Either we fight, or we die" being a common one. Clearly, in most cases, fight or die are not the only options. One can flee, one can fight head-on, or they can go behind enemy lines. The options are not either-or as is suggested. Because of this, this fallacy is sometimes referred to as an "either-or fallacy."

 

 

Red Herring

A red-herring fallacy is when a position is countered by making a statement or response that seems relevant, but in fact is not on-topic. The response is often disguised and believable as relevant, even if this is not the case. Somebody discussing theft sentences being increased to 1 year instead of 6 months is a good example of this. If somebody were to reply, "Well, I know somebody who committed murder and got away with it," this would be a red-herring. The reply is mostly relevant, as it is referring to crime and punishment, along with sentencing, however, it is not truly acknowledging or counter-arguing the original statement.?

 

 

 

======================================================================================================================================

 

 

Of course, there are many more logical fallacies than these listed. I simply wanted to make a short guide of the most popular ones. My reason behind this is that today, rationalism and logical reasoning seems to be on the rise. However, with this, logical fallacies too become more apparent. Plus, it may teach someone something new, and that's well-worth it in my opinion! :)

Edited July 6, 2018 by Mathew Steel

[EaglePrince 234]

Quite interesting to read! We used to learn about some of these in high school, but I think not all of them, and we called them differently - of course. And we learned some others which are not listed here. But even those I knew about - I'm glad to learn English names for them.

[Nigel 71]

...it may teach someone something new ...

 

Well, it certainly did. :)

I may have been aware of some of these subconsciously, but it is good to see them spelled out and made aware of.

 

Interesting topic.

Edited July 15, 2018 by Nigel

[Mathew Steel 151]

I'm glad you guys were able to take something from these! Maybe I'll add more in the future :)