About Fallacies
About Fallacies
About Fallacies
An efficient logical thought process is vital to many daily processes. "Lack of training in critical thinking leaves us all the more prone to errors in logic, which are known as fallacies. Only by learning common fallacies and avoiding them in our day-to-day thought processes can we develop the critical thinking skills we need to be effective problem-solvers" (Vinoski, 1998). Fallacies are, in short, arguments that have failed the to outline three basic premises. In order to create a supported, logical argument, one must satisfy the following: assertions, inference or evidence, and conclusion. Two types of fallacies are fallacies of relevance and fallacies of insufficient evidence. Each contains a mistake in reasoning, either through irrelevance of information or lack of supporting evidence. This paper will cover the inappropriate appeal to authority, hasty generalization, and straw man fallacies.
Inappropriate appeal to authority may be more pervasive than you realize. Think of all the celebrity-endorsed commercials on television. As the Buick spokesperson, does Tiger Woods' representation of the car company make you more prone to buy a Buick? Do you trust in Tiger Woods' expert opinion on golf or cars? This is an example of a person that "is not qualified to have an expert opinion on the subject" (http://www.datanation.com). We usually see clearly through this fallacy and are not lead by these non-expert opinions. The gulf between the so-called expert and the subject is not always so gaping. Television ads often have medical professionals supporting, perhaps, an orthopedic bed. This doctor may be qualified to state an expert opinion because he is, in fact, a medical doctor. His opinion on orthopedic beds, though, may be a lone voice. Some professionals do not see eye-to-eye, and, in this case, "experts in the field [may] disagree on this issue" (http://www.datanation.com). ...
Please login to view the full essay...