Fallacies

Fallacies

There are numerous types of fallacies an individual can possibly encounter every day. In order to recognize a fallacy a person needs to know exactly what a fallacy is. Fallacies often require an individual to use his or her critical thinking skills in order to make intelligent decisions. In this paper I will point out some of the different types of fallacies an individual might encounter, some examples of each fallacy and the effects each may have on the critical thinking and decision-making process.

A logical fallacy is a reasoning error, which is different from an error of the facts. More specifically, a fallacy is an "argument" where the premise given does not provide the conclusion the needed support. An argument consists of one or more premises and one conclusion. A premise is a statement, either true or false that is offered to support a claim being made. The claim, which is the conclusion, can also be either true or false. (LaBossiere, 2004)

Logical fallacies can be one of two types; fallacies of relevance and fallacies of insufficient evidence. Fallacies of relevance are those in which the premises are logically irrelevant to the conclusion. Fallacies of insufficient evidence have premises that appear to be logical to the conclusion but fail to provide enough evidence. (Bassham, Irwin, Nardone, Wallace, 2002)

Ad hominem, or argument against the person, is one of the most common fallacies. This fallacy falls into a general category which claims and/or arguments are rejected on irrelevant facts about the presenter of the claim. Since the claims against the presenter usually have no bearing or significance to the original claim this becomes a fallacy.

In order to make a proper decision an individual will need to remain focused on the rational evaluations of the premises presented and not on an emotional reaction. As individuals people tend to react to personal attacks more than to a complex argument. For this reason the attack on the person is often more effective on someone who is not thinking critically. To call an accusation an ad hominem a person must decide if the attack is relevant. For example, attacks on a person for his or her religious beliefs are irrelevant to the quality of his or her ability to balance a budget. The same attack however might be relevant to arguments of he or she running for a political office. The ad hominem fallacy takes form in a number of ways, though all share the fact that they attempt to re-focus a person's attention away from the argument and focus onto the person making the argument. (Mesher, 1996)

Since humans are social beings, one of our strongest emotions involves the attachment to groups and there are several ways to appeal to that emotion. The "bandwagon" fallacy operates on the notion that one acts in concert with a group's decision regardless of the merits of the argument.

Closely related to the appeal to popularity fallacy is the bandwagon fallacy. The bandwagon fallacy places emphasis on current fads, trends and on the growing support for an idea, whereas the appeal to popularity does not. The name bandwagon comes from the phrase "jump on the bandwagon", a bandwagon being a wagon big enough to hold a band of musicians. Reasoning of this type is an effective and persuasive device and commonly used. Individuals have the tendency to conform to the majority. Persuading an individual to believe the majority approves a claim is an effective way to get him or her to accept the claim. One of the moist common uses of the bandwagon fallacy is in the advertising industry. Products are being sold claiming everyone is using and loving his or her products. (LaBossiere)

The "red herring" is as much a debate tactic as it is a logical fallacy. Red Herring is a fallacy of distraction, and is committed when a listener attempts to divert an arguer from his argument by introducing another topic. This can be one of the most frustrating,