Download Refuting Arguments Recognizing Fallacies

Survey
yes no Was this document useful for you?
   Thank you for your participation!

* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project

Document related concepts
no text concepts found
Transcript
Refuting Arguments
Recognizing Fallacies
Honors Language Arts 10
Persuasive Research Speech
Refute Definition
To Disprove, to prove to be false.
Purpose
• When you persuade someone, you will need to
concern yourself with those who either
disagree with you or have no opinion at all.
Consider the audience!
• Think about biases, or prejudices, your
audience might have. Be prepared to refute
any objections, or counterarguments readers
may propose.
Refute the logic
Think about the opposing argument. Is their argument logical?
• Use complete information to support solid
arguments against faulty logic.
• Check for generalizations.
• Check that inductive and deductive arguments
are used in the right way.
• Use solid data that is hard to challenge
• Look for bias, intentional or otherwise, and
point out the flaws in logic.
Recognizing fallacies (errors in
logic) can help you identify an
error in an opposing
argument!
Post hoc ergo Propter hoc
“after it, therefore because of it”
Fallacy
This fallacy assumes that just because
y follows x, x causes y. It sets up a
cause/effect relationship but
identifies a cause that’s wrong or
only one of several.
Black and White
Fallacy
This reduces complex situations to
two alternatives, one black and
one white. Presents only two
alternatives or outcomes, as if
there were only town, when there
are really more.
Faulty Analogy Fallacy
Fallacy in which x and y are alike, but
not in the features that matter to the
argument. Sometimes comparisons
appear to be analogous but they
really are not. Don’t be fooled by a
clever, but sneaky writer or a not-soclever one who just doesn’t see the
fault in his/her reasoning.
Genetic Fallacy
Arguing that the behavior,
personality, abilities etc…are a
result of ethnicity or genetics.
Ad hominem (to the person)
Fallacy
This is a personal attack that has
nothing to do with logic. It’s
different from a Tu quoque
argument because there’s no
comparison used.
Game Time!
• Decide whether or not each of the
following statements are fallible or
infallible.
• The room will be divided in half-choose
one spokesperson from each side to say
the groups’ final answer.
• The side of the room to get the most
correct will get some candy! 
Herbert Hoover single-handedly
created the depression.
Answer:
Post hoc ergo propter hoc
(“after it, therefore because of it”)
If President George Bush hadn’t been
in office for so long our nation
wouldn’t be in shambles.
Answer:
Post hoc ergo propter hoc
(“after it, therefore because of it”)
Surveys showed that married men are
happier than unmarried men.
Answer:
Faulty Analogy
Marijuana use should remain illegal
because it’s a first step toward the
more serious drugs; most heroin
addicts started with marijuana.
Answer:
Faulty Analogy
If you’re not following recycling laws,
you don’t care about your
environment.
Answer:
Pot hoc ergo propter hoc
(“After it, therefore because of it”)
You’ll never understand health
care reform because you’re a
republican.
Answer:
Ad hominem (to the person)
In the coming election you have a
choice between voting for me or
voting for fiscal irresponsibility.
Answer:
Black and White
People trapped in the ghetto have two
choices in life: be a menial laborer
and starve or take to crime.
Answer:
Black and White
No way would he do that; his dad’s a
doctor.
Answer:
Genetic Fallacy
"Forcing students to attend cultural events is
like herding cattle to slaughter. The
students stampede in to the event where
they are systematically ‘put to sleep’ by
the program."
Answer:
Faulty Analogy
When you recognize fallacies in
arguments you can point out these
holes to refute them!
Check out this example…
If you’re not following recycling laws, you don’t care about
your environment.
This is an example of the “Pot hoc ergo propter hoc”
fallacy that suggests a cause/effect relationship but it
is only one of several.
Refuting example:
It is not true that not following recycling laws implies
that you don not care about the environment because
there are several ways to show disrespect towards the
environment in addition to refusing to follow
recycling laws, such as simply leaving your lights on
when you leave the house.