What are logical fallacies, evidence, and error in misconceptions? The report will identify nine logical fallacies. If all evidence in an argument appears to be true, still the disputation may be invalid if the logic utilized is not sanctioned (“Logical Fallacies,” 2014). Another name for it is called logical error, in philosophy. There are many fallacies to be aware of when making a sound argument. The nine logical fallacies are Mere assertion/Circular reasoning/Ad hominem, Red herring/Pseudo-questions/False cause, and Sweeping generalizations/Slippery slope/Equivocation or changing means. `
Mere assertion/Circular reasoning/Ad hominem
1. Mere assertion is when one says a statement is true, because he or she straightforwardly believe it. When one is convinced by his own opinions, the opposite view is still invalid. Only when one provides several pieces of evidence, and support it with inductive or deductive statements. For example, the dog did not eat the wedding cake, because he’s trained better. Father did not say that he hates the family, because he’s a loving man. In short, the frog did not jump over the fence, because it would not do that.
2. Circular reasoning is when the cessation and the previous statement are similar (n.d., 2013). It cannot prove a conclusion, because if that is doubted, so is the premise. Also, known as paradoxical thinking. For instance, bridges are strong, because there are built by expert construction workers, and construction workers have good engineering skills so the bridges were safe. Ancient Egypt is the most well-known civilization, because they built the pyramids. In sum, Sparta was a strong city, because they defended it with three hundred men.
3. Ad hominem is when one sends pers...
... middle of paper ...
...s is entertaining; doing it feels exciting, so therefore watching movies will always be exciting. In summary, listening to music is peaceful; doing feels relaxing, so therefore listening to music will always be relaxing.
Conclusion
Finally, those are the nine logical fallacies. It’s something everyone should learn, because it’s important that people do not have misconceptions towards each other. Especially, if one based, it in an unsound argument. Fallacies can only make things worse. By following these examples, perhaps it may be easier now, that one has an idea of what to watch out for.
References
Logical Fallacies. (2014). Introduction to Logical Fallacies. Retrieved from http://www.theskepticsguide.org/resources/logical-fallacies n.d. (2013). Logical Fallacies. Retrieved from
https://class.aiuniv.edu/_layouts/MUSEViewer/Asset.aspx?MID=MU15795&aid=AT80210
Summary – There are seven logical sins but the main three comes down to bad proof, bad conclusion, and disconnect between proof and conclusion. We all are bound to mistakes, especially during an argument, but it is very important to detect fallacies and understand how to get out of them if we wish to use them because it can damage the persuasion left on the
In this book, many fallacious quotations were used to support Skousen’s viewpoints. These quotations were blindly accepted due to the attached name without proper insight into the context of the quotation. It seemed as if Skousen frequently misinterpreted his sources purposely to authenticate his argument, often without proper justification or a well-reasoned argument. The audience was ultimately misled to believe flimsy assertions with unproven conclusions; Skousen achieved this by supporting axioms that will be widely accepted and by jumping to conclusions with which we have
The point is valid and their reasoning is sound, but it does not prove that
A paradox stems from a statement that apparently contradicts itself yet might still be true. In most cases logical paradoxes are essentially known to be invalid but are used anyways to promote critical thinking. The Raven’s paradox is an example of a paradox that essentially goes against what most logical paradoxes stand for in that it tries to make a valid claim through inductive logic. Carl Hempel is known for his famous accepting of this paradox with minor adjustments by the use of the contraposition rule. In this paper, however, I argue that Hempel’s solution to the Raven’s paradox is actually unsuccessful because he fails to take into account a possible red herring that serves as evidence against his solution. Irvin John Good is responsible for the formulation of the red herring argument as he tries to prove that the observation of a black raven can potentially negate the Raven’s paradox as valid. In addition to Good’s claim, Karl Popper and his view of falsificationism also functions as evidence to reject Hempel’s solution. Using Popper’s view as a basis, Israel Scheffler and Nelson Goodman formulate the concept of selective confirmation to reject the contraposition rule used by Hempel. Based off of all of the rejections that Hempel’s solution has it can clearly be seen that the Raven’s paradox has flaws that principally lead it to it being invalid.
“Thou shall not Commit Logical Fallacies” Logical fallacies are tricks and illusions of thought. They are often very sneakily used by politicians and the media to fool people into thinking in a specific way. There are a lot of ways that people make terrible and invalid arguments. Making a good argument is about using logic to prove a conclusion based on some given facts.
In this editorial from the Citizen-times, we are considering some issues about Iran and their uranium enrichment program. The foreign minister of Iran said that it would be against the ‘ways of Islamic thinking’ to produce weapons of mass destruction. Well, it should be against anyone’s ways of thinking to produce weapons of mass destruction. There are only a few reasons to make uranium, and most of them have to do with the making of explosives and types of weapons that create havoc and mayhem. So I’d have to say that one of the logical fallacies in this passage has to do with the foreign minister of Iran tiring to get us to believe that just because it’s ’against Islamic ways of thinking’, I’d have to say he needs to give us a little more information than that. Iran keeps tiring to tell us that the nuclear activities are peaceful. If I am correct, and I believe that I am, that anything to do with nuclear ‘activities’ probably wouldn’t fall into the peaceful category. I’m not too sure about the quote, “ Foreign Minister Kamel Kharrazi told reporters. "Iran is a promoter of the elimination of nuclear weapons around the world and, based on our ideology, on our Islamic thinking, it is forbidden to produce and use nuclear weapons and other weapons of mass destruction." I think that I’d have to label this as a logical fallacy. Some of this quote might be true, but if anything, I think that Iran is just trying to get us to believe them so we will get off their case. They have had weapons of mass destruction before, so why wouldn’t they have them again? Although Iran keeps trying to convince us of this, the state of this nation still is convinced by mister Bush that Iran is ’’the world’s primary state in sponsoring of terror’’. I don’t really know how true this statement is, but I’m pretty sure that Bush is proposing a logical fallacy here when he says this.
Clifford’s arguments for this conclusion is that if we are gullible enough to believe something without evidence then we are not only harming our individual credibility and intellect but also polluting the rest of society...
Fallacies, in terms of logic, are forms of flawed thinking. They are obstacles—weeds in the garden of the mind, which can be difficult to distinguish from the plants if not closely observed. The nature of fallacies falls in with our nature as human beings—they do not like to be discovered and plucked any more than we like to be the ones to admit that we are incorrect. Accepting responsibility for our actions, and in this case fallacies in our thinking, is the first step to change. Thus, if we can overcome our human pride and admit our flaws to ourselves, we are then empowered to correct them. Therein lies the value of examining these fallacies, which is an important component of studying critical thinking.
In conclusion, people do not contradict themselves when they say they are not infallible, because they are not applying this statement in whole to every aspect of their being, rather there are certain circumstances and ramifications in which it applies, and certain causes that spur a person to agree with this statement.
No matter what you listen to, music has a way to “play with our emotions”. For example, if you listen to Tchaikovsky (classical) you may feel calm, and if you listen to Eminem (rap) you may feel hyper. If the music you listen to makes you feel good, it is good for you, Daniel Levitin, a Neuroscientist who focuses mainly on music, explains in an interview.
As we know fallacies are used very often in our lives. Ad Hominem fallacy is not an exception. Lately, in Democrat's governor nominee election, I noticed an Ad Hominem fallacy happened between Phil Angelides and Steve Westley. They used each other personal life and their investments against each other instead of proving each other wrong by scientific proofs. The environment was the subject of many exchanges TV ads between them.
For some people, music serves as a distraction, but this does not apply for everyone. It should also be recognized that music helps keep the brain relaxed, happy, and alert(“Listening to music while you study makes you smarter” par. 5). As stated in an article "Music and Learning" on thelearningweb.net website, "Music relaxes the mind and lowers stress levels that inhibit learning” (qtd. in Petersen par. 2).“Ms. JenniferEllingson, a teacher at Floyd Dryden Middle School says, "Music is the best thing ever created. Music can be relaxing, because it helps you forget about things that are stressful and help you to focus” (Petersen par. 3).
In today’s society, fallacies are all around us either in politics, television, radio or even picking up an old fashion newspaper. They can be misleading and may cause bad judgement if they are not evaluated property. Some can even fool you because the argument may have a valid point, but the point does not lead to the correct conclusion.
Think back on a time when you experienced something stressful. How did you cope with it? Recall a time when you needed to relax. What did you use to help you? Chances are your answers involve music. The desire to play music while working, studying, or even relaxing is universal. Whether playing the music, singing along, or just listening, music can have many positive effects that aren’t often recognized. Music is unique in its ability to stimulate more than just one brain hemisphere, incorporating both the right and left sides of the brain. Because both sides of the brain are being affected, there are both creative and analytical benefits to making music part of daily routines. It’s no secret that listening to or playing music is enjoyable, but studies have proven that music can boost more than just your mood.
2. Getting caught up in the “intentional fallacy” means that the critic becomes fixated on