Logical Fallacies

Simon Chan and Thomas Pinkhasov period 9 DEBATES. 

Logical Fallacies - Understanding logical fallacies through a Gallery walk. 

Analysis of fallacies for argument purposes

Helps with debates in the future. 

Slippery slope- Give them an inch they are going to want a mile. “Butterfly effect”. 

Philip Dulas 

Anecdotal fallacy - 

Amber - uses personal experiences. Don’t want to believe in statistics. 

Michelle - some people tend to use personal experiences from themselves or from people they know and refuse to accept other scientific evidence and research proving otherwise.

“Happened to someone I know, must be true…”

Tu quoque- someone who is accused, reverses, and turns on the other using a claim for hypocrisy. 

Ronald - Blaming others for being hypocritical, when 

Pot calling the kettle black example. 

Fallacy Fallacy

Gabrielle - Trying to claim another’s argument is wrong since it contains a fallacy. The better  person at arguing their case could win, not the one who is actually “right”

Zhixing- Argument can’t be completely wrong/denied because it contains a fallacy. Redirect the actual argument by picking apart certain wording claims just to prove that the speaker is wrong.

Ad Hominem(for/against man)

Gabrielle - Use someone’s character as a reason that they are correct/incorrect. Attacking someone personally as an example. 

Circular reasoning - 

Brooke Zhou- claims can be true, but the way you justify it is a fallacy. Can’t use your original claim to support the evidence you are giving. 

Going in a circle- chicken and the egg. 

What you are trying to prove is used as evidence. Use the definition as the answer.

Burden of proof

Jacob Gurevich - Trying to evade their burden of proof by pretending that they have met the conditions without actually having done it or shifting the blame/burden to another person.

Begging the question

Circular reasoning similarity. Using the argument as evidence to establish a conclusion

Texas Sharpshooter Fallacy

Joe Tesoriero- Being ignorant of all the other information/ evidence only using evidence that supports one's own. Disregard contradicting/ existing statements or values. See what you want to see. 

No true Scotsman 

Allan - Trying to justify an argument by removing other evidence/ claims that counter it. 

Straw Man Fallacy.

Can’t go out past 10, you don’t care about my politics. Reroute the argument “ put words in another's mouth. Changing the premise of the argument to fit one's agenda. Attacking the person itself. 

False Fallacy. 

Relate two things. False Reasoning. Coincidence = fallacy. Can’t jump to such conclusions. 

Genetic Fallacy

Nathan. Blame your failures based on origin or history. Failing a road test, blames it on their parents failing as well. Stereotypes can also be included in this. 

Apple doesn’t fall far from the tree. 

Gambler's fallacy

Based on the idea of probability. Oh, I lost so many lottery tickets, one of them is bound to be a win. 

Black / white fallacy

Given two choices. There is a third/more choice. Stuck between a rock and a hard place. NO grey, have to choose one or another. 

Middle ground

Ethan Tsvayg - making a compromise, but has to be cohesive. Resolve a conflict in the most optimal way.

The Argument from ignorance. 

Matthew - A certain argument is true just because it hasn’t been proven false. Making an appeal to ignorance. Ties into the burden of proof. Since there is no reason to believe any other claim. 

Reflection:

    Today we had a “gallery” walk-in in which each student presented their own logical fallacy to the class and was analyzed through a deeper perspective. I learned about the various types of fallacies that are important for having a strong and compelling argument. Identifying them in arguments is crucial so that you can avoid being misled when listening to a speech/argument. I learned the different types of fallacies and how to use them so that I can get better at public speaking and strengthen my arguments in the debate. In the future, I plan to use these fallacies in my speeches and my research papers.

    Some of the ones I plan to use is the anecdotal fallacy in which I would use my own personal experiences to convince my audience of my point of view.  Sometimes it is more effective to use a personal testimony in order to prove a point since more people can relate to it. Another example I would be able to identify is Ad Hominem which is when someone turns the argument into something involving one’s character. It is important to recognize fallacies like this so that I can be more aware when I am in debates and point out the fallacies to others to weaken/strengthen arguments.

    Looking back to the lesson, I think that logical fallacies are really important for any debate or any conversation that we have with other people. Whether it be an argument or a controversial topic, knowing how to recognize and address these logical fallacies is what really helps you stick out and become a better speaker. Honestly, some of the logical fallacies surprised me and I knew a couple of them already such as the gambler's fallacy. I find the gambler's fallacy very amazing and relatable to people and it is just like what the name sounds like, " gambler's" and gambling. They use the chance of probability of how after so many losses or bad points, that one of them is bound to be valid and be a winner.

    The challenge that we had to overcome was the sheer amount of logical fallacies that were being presented by the students. There wasn't nearly enough time to cover all of them, but we were able to jot down and take notes on most of them by working together. Next time I would have researched all the logical fallacies beforehand to get a gist of some of the important ones so that I can quickly take notes and understand the material when it is provided during class. Additionally, I could've asked more questions during class so that I could gain more details and key points revolving around each logical fallacy.

    Overall, this blog was very insightful and it taught us so much in terms of logical fallacies. 

I would assess myself and my blog to be well done since it covers all the fallacies and goes in-depth on the explanations and the interpretations on each one. An image is pulled up for each fallacy and the visuals are there. Additionally, we noted who said which fallacy in case of future reference was needed.