An appeal to force is a type of informal fallacy that arises when the arguer, instead of showing the evidence, appeals to intimidation or use force to gain acceptance of his or her argument. In other words, the appeal to force fallacy happens when the arguer tries to persuade the other (or the listener) by pointing out his or her power over the other or warning the other of the bad consequences if he or she refuses to accept his or her argument.
Let us consider the examples below.
Example 1
College Dean to a teacher: You better think twice before giving that student a failing grade. Remember, he is the nephew of the university president.
Example 2
Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, if you do not bring in a verdict of guilty, you may be the killer’s next victim.
Example 3
Mr. Ambassador, I’m sure you will agree that your coming does not have a legitimate claim to the disputed territory along our borders. After all, we have divisions of troops ready to protect our interest at all times.
Example 4
Father to a daughter: You should study Nursing; otherwise, I will not send you to college.
Example 5
Smith, we cannot have this statement on expenditures coming to the attention of the president. You have been the accountant here for nearly twenty years. It would be a shame to ruin all that now. I think it would be wise of you to take another look at the book, don’t you?
Now, if we analyze the examples above, we can notice that the arguer poses a threat to the listener, saying, in effect: “Accept my conclusion or you will be sorry.”
As we can obviously see, the fact that the arguer intimidates or poses a threat to the listener does not make her conclusion true.
An argument against the person (ad hominem) is a type of informal fallacy that arises when the arguer ignores the real claims or issues in the argument so that what is emphasized is the character, personality, or belief of the opponent. In other words, in the argument against the man, the arguer attacks the person rather than the person’s ideas in order to drive his point.
Let us consider the example below.
Example 1
You honor, it is impossible for us not to believe that the accused of this murder case is not guilty because his father and grandfather had been convicted of murder several years ago. And besides, the accused is of bad moral reputation.
As we can see, the arguer in the example above attacks the personality of the accused instead of providing the proofs or evidence that indeed it is the accused has committed the crime. For sure, we cannot say that the accused is guilty of the crime of murder simply because he is of bad moral reputation or his father and grandfather had been convicted of murder several years ago. Again, the arguer needs to show the proofs in order to say that the accused is guilty of the crime of murder.
The following examples may help further illustrate the fallacy of argument against the person (ad hominem):
Example 2
Well now, you have heard Professor Smith tell us about the theory of evolution. But I am not surprised that he neglected to tell you that he is an atheist. How can this man speak the truth, I ask you?
Example 3
I’m not surprised that your mechanic recommends a complete engine overhaul. Do you know how much money he gets from that?
Example 4
It was his fault, officer. You can tell me by the kind of car I am driving and the kind of clothing I am wearing that I am a good citizen and would not lie. Look at the rattletrap that he is driving, and look at how he dressed. You can’t believe anything that a dirty, long-haired hippie like that man might tell you. Search his car; he probably has a pot in it.
Example 5
Franklin Putnam says he would make a good president. But he is no man for the White House; not only has he been divorced, but he is a Catholic and divorced.
An appeal to pity is a type of informal fallacy that arises when an appeal to evidence is replaced by an appeal to pity or mercy. The point here is that in making an argument, we are supposed to provide evidence or proofs to our claim or conclusion.
But in an appeal to pity, as already pointed out, the arguer does not have the evidence or proofs for his claim; hence, he is forced to invoke pity to win the sympathy of the listener.
Let us consider the example below.
Example 1
There is no question that what this young man did is intolerable and repugnant. He admits it himself. But you are not here to evaluate this man’s conduct morally; you are here to try him and determine his guilt or innocence. And as you think this over, I want you to think hard about this young man, his home and his future, which you now hold in your hands. Think about his broken home, never knowing his father, being left by his mother. Think about the poverty he has known, the foster homes, the birthdays go unnoticed, and the Christmas he has never had. And think hard about the life in prison will do to him. Think about these things, and I know you will acquit him of this crime.
As we can see in the example above, the lawyer argues that his client should be acquitted because he is miserable and is a victim of an unfortunate life. However, even if it is true that indeed the accused is miserable and is a victim of an unfortunate life, it would be fallacious to conclude that the accused is not guilty or he should be acquitted simply because his life had been hard or because bringing in a verdict of guilty would add to his misery.
For sure, the lawyer needs to provide strong proofs that would show that the accused has not committed the crime (for example, of a felony) before he may conclude that his client is not guilty.
The following examples may help further illustrate the fallacy of appeal to pity:
Example 2
Your honor, the accused of this robbery case must not be put to jail because he is a father of 12 children and a husband of a woman who is suffering from cancer. Besides, he is the only breadwinner in the family.
Example 3
Greg should not be given a failing grade in Calculus 101 because he has taken the subject thrice already.
Example 4
I know my paper is late, Prof. Smith, but my roommate was sick last night and I had to help her. Also, my folks will kill if I flunk this course.
Example 5
I appeal to you, not for Thomas Kidd, but I appeal to you for the long line―the long line reaching back through the ages and forward to the years to come―the long line of despoiled and downtrodden people of the earth. I appeal to you for those men who rise in the morning before daylight comes and who go home at night when the light has faded from the sky and give their life, their strength, their toil to make others rich and great. I appeal to you in…the name of those little children, the living and the unborn.
An appeal to ignorance is a type of informal fallacy that arises when an argument is taken as true because it has not proven to be false, or an argument is false because it has not proven to be true.
Put differently, in an appeal to ignorance fallacy, the arguer claims that some statement P is true because someone failed to prove that P is false, or statement P is false because no one has proven that it is true. Hence, in each case, the lack of evidence or proof that P is true or false is used as a reason for concluding that P is true or false.
The form of an appeal to ignorance fallacy looks like this:
We do not know that P is false. Therefore, P must be true.
or
We do not know that P is true. Therefore, P must be false.
Let us consider this example to clearly illustrate this point:
Example 1
Well, I have examined all the arguments for the existence of God, and I have seen that none of them proves that God exists. That’s reason enough for me: there is no God!
In the example above, the arguer concludes that there is no God because there are no successful proofs of God’s existence. But the absence of a successful proof of God’s existence does not justify the conclusion that there is no God. What the arguer is justified in the example above is that we cannot know God.
The following examples will further illustrate the fallacy appeal to ignorance:
Example 2
The existence of heaven must be true because nobody has ever successfully defended that it is just a product of one’s imagination.
Example 3
Scientists have not proven that AIDS cannot be transmitted through casual contact. Therefore, there is no need for us to keep away from suspected AIDS carriers.
The appeal to people fallacy is a variation of the appeal to authority. It consists in arguing that some statement p is true because most people believe p. In other words, an appeal to people fallacy arises when one who, instead of concentrating on the relevant facts of the argument, gives more emphasis on the emotions and opinions of the people as the basis of her conclusion.
According to logicians, the fallacy of appeal to people is in effect an appeal to commonly or traditionally held beliefs.
This type of informal fallacy is commonly found in advertisements where products are recommended by asserting that “everyone uses it” or “a majority of the population use it”. Let us consider the example below.
“Budweiser is better than any other beer in the world because 90% of the Americans drink it.”
In the example above, one is arguing that Budweiser is the best beer in the world because many or almost all of the Americans drink it. Put differently, the unstated premise here is that the best-selling beer is the best beer, and the conclusion is that since we ought to buy the best beer, then we ought to buy Budweiser.
Obviously, this is not a sound or valid argument. The fact that 90% of the Americans drink Budweiser entails neither that Budweiser is the best nor we ought to drink one.
Just as in many other types of informal fallacy, what we notice in the appeal to people fallacy is that it lacks the necessary evidence that we can appropriate to prove that indeed that claim is true. Hence, in the example above, we ought to provide the proof for us to be able to conclude that Budweiser is the best beer in the world.
For example, we may say that 90% of the people in the world said that Budweiser tastes better than any other beer available in the market or it is proven that Budweiser contains more vitamins and minerals than any other beer available in the market.
In this way, it is logical to conclude that indeed, Budweiser is the best beer in the world.
Below are some of the examples of the fallacy of appeal to people.
Example 1:
Tide Ultra is better than Surf because many Filipinos used it.
Example 2:
Well, for centuries people have believed in God, and I just don’t see how so many people could be mistaken. So that’s why I choose to believe.
Example 3:
Working one’s way through college is a cherished American concept, according to Dr. Newman, former president of the University of Rhode Island.
To recognize the fallacy of appeal to people, we need only to look for an argument in which the conclusion is based on assertions about commonly or traditionally held beliefs. We may also look for solid evidence that can back up the claim; if there is none, then it is safe to conclude that the claim or argument is fallacious.
The fallacy of hasty generalization occurs when a generalization is formed on the basis of an unrepresentative sample. As we may already know, to be accurate, a generalization about a group should be based upon a sample that reflects the diversity of that group. One way of ensuring a representative sample, in some cases, is to select as large a sample as possible. The more people polled, for example, the more likely it is that the results truly represent the group. However, an accurate generalization does not necessarily require a large sample. In Gallup opinion polls, generalizations are typically based on surveys of a very small number of people. However, the pollsters are careful to select a typical or representative group of people for their sample. Let us consider the following examples below.
Example 1
I have surveyed twenty-five students―each from a different campus organization―out of a student body of two thousand, and all of them prefer to use the activity fund for a film series. So, probably the majority of all students would prefer a film series.
Example 2
I have spoken to the members of the campus Glee Club, and they prefer to use the activity fund for a film series on birds. So, probably a majority of the two thousand students would prefer a film series on birds.
As we can see, the arguer in the first example forms a generalization about the preferences of two thousand students on the basis of a sample drawn from various campus groups. It is, therefore, reasonable to assume that this sample accurately reflects the diversity of opinion among the students. Thus, this generalization does not commit the fallacy of hasty generalization.
However, in the second example, the generalization is based solely upon a survey of one, rather select group, the members of the Glee Club. Although their preferences should be considered, it is not likely that their group is representative of the student body as a whole; neither is it a random sample of opinions. Hence, the generalization rests on an unrepresentative sample.
Let us consider another example. Columnist Ann Landers conducted an informal survey in which she asked her women readers to reply to this question: “Would you be content to be held close and treated tenderly and forget about “the act”? She reports that 100, 000 women responded, with 72 percent answering yes. Among the conclusions:
Example 3
The most surprising aspect of this survey was that 40 percent of the yes votes were from women under forty years of age. What does this say about the sexual revolution? It says, in the boudoir at least, it has been an abysmal failure.
Landers reports that 72, 000 women answered yes and that of that group, 42 percent, or 28, 800, were under forty years of age. She concludes that the sexual revolution “has been an abysmal failure” on the basis of the 28, 800 women under age forty who answered yes. Setting aside the problems with the survey questions itself and, in particular, the meaning of a yes answer, can we say that her sample of 28, 800 women is large enough to support a generalization about a majority of the nation’s approximately 2 million women under the age forty years? Although it is a significant sample, we may wonder whether it is indeed representative of the nation’s women under forty. Landers provide no further information about the makeup of the sample. We know only that it is composed of women forty years or under who read the survey and responded. Lacking such information we cannot conclude that is an accurate generalization, and we may suspect the fallacy of hasty generalization.
To identify the fallacy of hasty generalization, we need to look for a conclusion that generalizes over a group, and notice whether the basis for the generalization is both representative of the group and sufficiently large to justify the generalization; otherwise, a fallacy of hasty generalization may have been committed.
A false cause is a type of informal fallacy that arises when one assigns as the cause those facts that merely preceded or accompanied the effect when in fact there is no good evidence of a logical connection or causal relation. Hence, an arguer commits the fallacy of false cause when he labels something as the cause of something else on the basis of insufficient or unrepresentative evidence. Let us consider the example below.
Example 1
Statistics show that nearly every heroin user started by using marijuana. It is reasonable to conclude, then, that marijuana leads to the harder drug.
As we can see in the example above, the arguer claims that the majority of the heroin users tried marijuana before using heroin. This might be true; however, the arguer concludes that smoking marijuana will necessarily lead to the use of harder drugs, such as heroin. The conclusion is obviously illogical or fallacious because there is no strong proof or evidence that the use of marijuana will necessarily lead to the use of harder drugs.
Let us consider another example of the fallacy of false cause.
Example 2
Last night I was so angry at my brother that I wished he was dead. And now he is in the hospital. God, if only I had not thought that. It is all my fault. I will never feel hatred again, not of everyone!
If we analyze the example above, it is clear that it is a fallacious argument. Even though the person in the example simply regrets having had ill feelings toward his brother, we cannot logically conclude that his act of wishing his brother dead is the cause of his brother getting sick. Indeed, there is no good reason to believe in this case that wishing it so has caused it to be so.
The last example below will further illustrate the fallacy of false cause.
Example 3
I blame the television media for the epidemic of hijackings, kidnappings, and other acts of terrorism. If we would stop televising terrorist acts, they would stop.
In this example, the arguer is implying that televising terrorist acts causes more terrorist acts simply because it will encourage terrorists to do so. While it might be true that televising terrorist acts may contribute to terrorism by giving the terrorists the attention they seek for their cause, reason tells us that we cannot ultimately attribute the act of televising terrorist acts to the rise of terrorism. As a matter of fact, terrorism will not cease if the media stops televising terrorist acts.
A slippery slope is a type of informal fallacy that arises when the arguer claims that a chain of causal events will necessarily occur. Hence, a slippery slope is committed when a person argues that some event or practice he or she disapproves of will trigger a sequence of events that will ultimately lead to some undesirable consequences. The reasoning here is that since we do not want the undesirable consequence, we ought therefore to oppose the initial event or practice. The fallacy in the reasoning consists in the false assumption that the chain of events will in fact occur.
Let us consider the example below.
Example 1
You have all heard of grade inflation. Well, I want to speak to you about grade depression: the serious harm we do to students by grading them too hard rather than too easily. What does it do to students to measure them by too strict a standard? It frustrates them. It conditions them to expect failure. They recoil from responsibility, always taking the easy route rather than learning to challenge and, hence, improve themselves. They develop a habit of dependency, and many develop the symptoms of neurosis and other psychological disorders. Can we afford a generation of weak, dependent people unsuited for the demands of contemporary society?
As we can see in the example above, the arguer opposes a strict grading policy by claiming that it will ultimately lead to a generation of weak, dependent people. The first stage in the causal chain, that is, strict grading leads to frustrations, is perhaps reasonable. But from that point on, the series of events is unlikely. As a matter of fact, there is no good reason to believe that harsh grading will lead to an expectation of failures, withdrawal from responsibility, and eventually dependency and neurosis. For this reason, the arguer in the example above commits the fallacy of slippery slope.
Again, the slippery slope fallacy is committed when we accept without further justification or argument that once the first stage in the causal chain is taken, the others are going to follow.
It is important to note that there is another form of a slippery slope fallacy, which occurs when it is assumed without warrant that slight differences or differences of degrees are unimportant. Let us consider the example below.
Example 2
There is no point in sending money to aid starving children in Haiti because there are also starving children in West Papua, and it would be unjust not to aid them as well.
If we analyze the example above, it says that there is no need for us to help the starving children in Haiti because this action cannot make a difference. After all, there are countless starving children around the world, especially in West Papua. Moreover, the example above says that it would be unjust on the part of the starving children in West Papua if we only send aid money to the starving children in Haiti. Hence, the argument says that if we send aid money to the starving children in Haiti, then we need to send aid money as well to all starving children around the world. Again, when this argument occurs, a fallacy of slippery slope is committed.
The fallacy of equivocation occurs when a term or word switches meaning in the course of the argument, that is, when a term or word expresses one meaning in one premise and another meaning in another premise or conclusion.
Let us consider the example below.
Example 1
Philosophy is an art. But art is practiced by painters. Therefore, philosophy is also practiced by painters.
As we can see, the premises of the argument above are plausible, and the argument appears to be valid. However, the term “art” is used in two different senses. In the first premise, the term art refers to a skill that requires creativity, imagination and the ability to think critically, while in the second premise it refers to the “fine arts” or the cultural institution which involves the fine arts (that is, painters in the case of the example above.
It must be noted that although it may be true that painters practiced the fine arts, it is not necessarily true that they practiced all the skills that involved creativity, imagination and the ability to think critically.
Let us consider another example.
Example 2
Logic is the study of arguments. Well, that is one course that I could ace. I know all about arguments. I have learned from experts. You should hear the arguments my parents have.
As we can see in the argument above, the arguer may conclude, in effect, that he would do well in the study of arguments because he knows all about arguments. But it is important to note that the word “argument” here is being used in two different senses. In the first sense, it means “reasoning”, but in the second sense it means “quarreling”. If we substitute the two senses of the word “argument” here, then we are able to clarify what the arguer, in fact, had said: that he would do well in the study of “reasoning” because he knows all about quarreling. This, of course, does not follow.
The examples below will further illustrate the fallacy of equivocation.
Example 3
“Impartiality” means not taking sides in a dispute; I had hoped that the judge would be impartial, but he ruled against me.
Example 4
All stars are heavenly bodies. But Angelina Jolie and Brad Pitt are stars. Therefore, there is a good reason to believe that Angelina Jolie and Brad Pitt are heavenly bodies.
The fallacy of composition is a type of informal fallacy which occurs when the arguer mistakenly concludes that something is true to the whole simply because it is true to some of the parts of the whole. Put differently, in the fallacy of composition, the arguer assumes that the truth of the part of the whole necessarily affects the truth of the whole. Hence, what is assumed to be true to the part of the whole is necessarily true to the whole.
Let us consider the example below.
Example 1
De La Salle University is an excellent university. I know it because De La Salle’s College of Nursing consistently tops the board exams for nursing.
As we can see, the assumption of the argument above is that what is true of the part (that is, De La Salle University’s College of Nursing) is true of the whole (that is, the entire De La Salle University). However, it is obvious that the assumption is false. It is false because the excellent performance of De La Salle’s College of Nursing in the board exams for nursing does not necessarily imply that De La Salle University is an excellent institution of higher learning. It might be the case that De La Salle’s College of Engineering performs very poorly in the board exams for engineering.
The examples below will further illustrate the fallacy of composition.
Example 2
The pink sweater is gorgeous. The purple skirt over there is smashing. I love those red shoes in the window, and how about that terrific yellow vest on the mannequin! Let us face it, it will make a great outfit for you!
Example 3
Smoking this cigarette surely cannot harm me. So, how can smoking cigarettes harm me?
Example 4
All the angles of a triangle are less than 180 degrees. Therefore angles PQR, STU, and XYZ, which compose this triangle, are less than 180 degrees.
Example 5
If anything is good for an outstanding and crucial industry, such as the steel industry, then it would be good for the country as a whole.
