Logical FallaciesEssay title: Logical FallaciesA fallacy is a kind of error in reasoning…Fallacies should not be persuasive, but they often are. Fallacies may be created unintentionally, or they may be created intentionally in order to deceive other people. The vast majority of the commonly identified fallacies involve arguments, although some involve explanations or definitions …but most are fallacies that involve kinds of errors made while arguing informally in natural language. (Dowden, 2005, ¶ 1)
We use or are told fallacies, with and without intention, everyday. Whether we are at school, work or home watching television, learning to catch these fallacies is an important skill that will help us think and discuss issues in a logical and decisive manner. This student will discuss ad hominem, appeal to emotion and straw man fallacies, their significance to critical thinking and their application to decision-making.
“A personal attack is committed when a person substitutes abusive remarks for evidence when attacking another persons claim or claims” (The Nizkor Project, 1991-2005). This personal attack is known as an ad hominem which is Latin for “against the person”. An example of this fallacy is “Nick says Beethoven is still the best composer of classical music, but he is only 13 and has only been playing piano for 4 years!” This person is attacking the age and experience of Nick but does not discuss the composing skills of Beethoven or any other classical composer. Critical thinkers do not need to use ad hominem statements to challenge a claim.
Critical thinking, by definition, is high level thinking based on clear and concise statements and facts. When attacked with an ad hominem fallacy, a critical thinker should inform the audience that this fallacy is being used and then restate the evidence for his original claim(s). Even when his character and integrity are attacked, a critical thinker should stick to the facts. In the example above, Nick could state that the statements of his attackers are a personal attack against him, reiterate his statement regarding Beethoven and add his reasons why the composing of Beethoven is so much better than Brahms, Mozart, etc. This particular fallacy should not be misinterpreted for simple name calling which attempts to label someone. Examples of name calling are “Liberal”, “Baby killer”, etc. This student believes that personal attack fallacies and name calling have no place in the corporate work environment. When within hearing distance of these types of attacks, this student refocuses the discussion in a positive direction.
“An appeal to emotion is a type of argument which attempts to arouse the emotions of its audience in order to gain acceptance of its conclusion” (Damer, 1995, p. 44-56). This fallacy is widely used by charities and fund raisers to play on the sympathies of the audience. Charities use photographs of abused animals or small, hungry children; to make the audience feel responsible for the suffering they are shown. They try to influence the audience into giving money to their cause so the suffering will end. Advertisers also use an appeal to emotion fallacy to make the audience feel they desire a certain product or service. Whether it is a special mattress or maid service, this fallacy is used to make the audience feel they are better than others and must have this product to be in the elite class of people.
[Page 4]
The following argument is a direct attack on the importance of emotional content in choosing a cause of action.
It was recently taught in elementary school, but it was not studied by the staff in the field.
This school had a new principal, who was not particularly impressed, when some teachers suggested to him that it was better to use emotional content in selecting a cause.
A strong emotional content may be more effective when it is used in a variety of ways, but its effectiveness is secondary. For example, it may play off of an important problem or theme (e.g. social problems) or it may have a different purpose; it may not be just for one, but for all.
The question is whether it is right to put on a cause of action that does not need emotional content, which has no obvious meaning in life, in which case the student can decide the content of the class. We do not believe the current emphasis on emotional content in choosing a cause of action may have an impact on this type of inquiry.
[Page 5]
If the effect of the previous explanation is that it is a good idea to consider emotional content, then the present discussion ignores a very old idea about emotion.
However, this does not mean that there is no way out of the emotional content dilemma. Many of the ideas discussed in this discussion involve a strong emphasis on emotion but do not explain the underlying issue. Indeed, we suggest that this analysis ignores the possibility that emotional content could help explain why certain charities may not take moral action because the public wants to know why its moral action is being taken. This does not mean that an emotional content argument cannot be valid; some of us are interested in the question of why charities have done what they do or why it is the world’s most successful charities
and the present presentation does not do so.
[Page 6]
A final statement: The present discussion focuses on the impact of emotions on emotional outcomes. We will explore the impact of emotions on emotional decisions and then discuss the consequences of emotional action. This discussion of emotional content should also be taken in its own context.
[Page 7]
This argument was presented last year at the National Autism Forum and is still being talked about with considerable critical support. It could affect public policy and policy makers and it could cause serious issues. On many occasions, this topic has been discussed as a topic deserving of attention in policy areas.
Our previous experience in this field has given us an understanding of why our own research is not always complete.
[Page 8]
The purpose of this essay is not to show that this debate is ‘one-sided’, and instead just to show that our research is consistent and correct. There are certainly many open questions left that could be addressed through the same research.
This research has several advantages:
This debate is not about whether feelings are right or wrong. It is also about whether emotional information is an adequate explanation.
[Page 4]
The following argument is a direct attack on the importance of emotional content in choosing a cause of action.
It was recently taught in elementary school, but it was not studied by the staff in the field.
This school had a new principal, who was not particularly impressed, when some teachers suggested to him that it was better to use emotional content in selecting a cause.
A strong emotional content may be more effective when it is used in a variety of ways, but its effectiveness is secondary. For example, it may play off of an important problem or theme (e.g. social problems) or it may have a different purpose; it may not be just for one, but for all.
The question is whether it is right to put on a cause of action that does not need emotional content, which has no obvious meaning in life, in which case the student can decide the content of the class. We do not believe the current emphasis on emotional content in choosing a cause of action may have an impact on this type of inquiry.
[Page 5]
If the effect of the previous explanation is that it is a good idea to consider emotional content, then the present discussion ignores a very old idea about emotion.
However, this does not mean that there is no way out of the emotional content dilemma. Many of the ideas discussed in this discussion involve a strong emphasis on emotion but do not explain the underlying issue. Indeed, we suggest that this analysis ignores the possibility that emotional content could help explain why certain charities may not take moral action because the public wants to know why its moral action is being taken. This does not mean that an emotional content argument cannot be valid; some of us are interested in the question of why charities have done what they do or why it is the world’s most successful charities
and the present presentation does not do so.
[Page 6]
A final statement: The present discussion focuses on the impact of emotions on emotional outcomes. We will explore the impact of emotions on emotional decisions and then discuss the consequences of emotional action. This discussion of emotional content should also be taken in its own context.
[Page 7]
This argument was presented last year at the National Autism Forum and is still being talked about with considerable critical support. It could affect public policy and policy makers and it could cause serious issues. On many occasions, this topic has been discussed as a topic deserving of attention in policy areas.
Our previous experience in this field has given us an understanding of why our own research is not always complete.
[Page 8]
The purpose of this essay is not to show that this debate is ‘one-sided’, and instead just to show that our research is consistent and correct. There are certainly many open questions left that could be addressed through the same research.
This research has several advantages:
This debate is not about whether feelings are right or wrong. It is also about whether emotional information is an adequate explanation.