Recognise these Logical Fallacies in Any Argument :- Types of Logical Fallacies.
In this case, cultivating fruitful conversations and decisions require logically loaded arguments from both parties - which in no way is errenous, manipulative, misrepresentive or poorly putted. A logically sound mind can even think very sharply - avoiding false assumptions or exaggerations etc.
Even as citizens, we often hear News Reports, Politicians, Economists or any Public Figures presenting their views, opinions or claims.
Being able to catch their errenous statements i.e logical fallacies is very important, as they might mislead us. Even while presenting our own thoughts, it is necessary to avoid logical errors and fallacies.
For example,
"If we vote for XYZ, eventually democracy will die out. This is because XYZ will lead us into an authoritarian regime and destroy our country, and everyone knows this, so we shouldn’t vote for them."
Sound familiar? The statements above are seemingly valid and commonly brought up in social media debates, news outlets and dinner conversations. But no matter how clever they sound, these types of statements are fallacies or otherwise poor arguments. They can result from either innocent mistakes in reasoning or deliberate attempts to manipulate an audience, but both usually occur in order to win an argument. Not only are fallacies extraordinarily commonplace in pop culture and media, but they can also lead one to believe downright ridiculous things just because they’re widely accepted or well said.
Fallacies are sneaky but can be found nearly everywhere – YouTube comments, Twitter replies, headlines and speeches by politicians. They sound clever, persuasive and probably look like a roast, but in reality, they’re a way for people to argue without providing any sort of evidence. And if they do offer evidence, it could outdated or irrelevant to their point.
Types of Common Logical Fallacies
1. Ad Hominem :-
Ad Hominem is the practice of attacking an individual’s character and not his or her argument. This explains the fact that while an argument goes on, people start attacking the character of an individual rather than being precise about the topic of the argument.
2. Strawman :-
Strawman is a logical fallacy where an individual states the argument of an opponent in a way that the opponent himself or herself might not have said.
The answerer either interprets the question in a wrong way or intentionally creates a "strawman" or a fake scenario which he shows to brilliantly tackle, but in reality, DODGING the actual argument.
It is a very common fallacy to sound clever. This is a fallacy what today’s Indian media uses.
3. False Generalisation :-
This is a logical fallacy which I myself used just now, which sounds like needlessly defaming the whole of Indian media. To point out most of the Indian media's mistake, I did a false generalisation of the entire community, which is unfair.
"False Analogy" too is a very common fallacy.
Many a times you might have heard of a debate settling down because of an individual using a beautiful analogy for illustrating his or her point. Analogies of all varieties break down at a certain point of time. It is just that you should know how and when do they break down for analyzing them properly.
4. Slippery Slope :-
Making exaggerating assumptions of a point to its negative effects is called Slippery Slope. It is often used for fear mongering.
For example,
If you fail to get good marks, you'll fail your exams. Hence you'll not get admission to any college. So you'll remain unemployed as well as unmarried. Lo, your life is completely destroyed!
If you'll not vote for Modi, India will become an Islamic state!
To study, we need paper. To get paper, we need to cut trees. In cutting trees, earth gets lesser oxygen. Hence, studying can kill us!
5. Loaded Question :-
It is a question which is already loaded with an assumption. Whether you answer yes or no, a conclusion to the argument is already made.
For example,
"Will you join Arvind Kejriwal's mission to eradicate corruption in India?"
Here, no matter you reply a yes or a no, an assumption already reflects Arvind Kejriwal in a good light. The initial argument of corruption in India gets no attention!
6. False Dichotomy :-
It is the act of offering two extremes as the only options available for a particular position when in reality there are a number of positions. People do this when they themselves are extremist. You say something against India and they will claim you are not a patriot and that you should go to Pakistan. If you are of the belief that hell is perpetual for every individual then you are basically a Universalist.
If not Modi then who? Rahul? National or else Anti-national.
7. Correlation equals Causation :-
It is the act of assuming that since two important things took place simultaneously, one was caused due to the other. Many a times, you might have heard professionals saying that there is an increase in the intelligence of people who listen to classical music. This is because there is a correlation between intelligence and classical music and this has been found out through studies conducted on this subject.
No doubt, many things were affected due to Corona, but blaming Corona fot everything is this fallacy.
8. Argument from Authority
Every human being argues from authority whether it is the authority of experience, logic, tradition, emotions or even the Bible. However, this must be avoided. Arguments from authority should completely be avoided and every individual should have a reason behind why he or she believes authority to be authoritative. The most common example of this is when you are having an argument with your teacher, or boss or parents. They might sometimes be wrong, but due to authority we need to obey them.
9. Red Herring:-
It involves continuous changes made to arguments in place of following arguments to their conclusions. Endless debates with no substance is an example of Red Herring.
10. Confusion is equal to cause
It is a fallacy that argues on the point that because human beings are not able to understand certain things, God is the ultimate solution. God might be responsible for it.
Is someone claiming that all Muslims are terrorists because a small group of them are? That’s a hasty generalization. Not all Muslims are terrorists, and a small few do not characterize the majority. Are they claiming that marriage has always been one man and one woman in this country? That’s an appeal to tradition. Just because something has always happened doesn’t mean it will or should continue to happen that way (see: slavery, racism). Are they claiming that one political party wants the country to fail because of their policy choices? That’s a strawman. A group favoring one policy choice you think will lead to bad consequences doesn’t mean they want to see the country fail. Are they equating the coronavirus to the flu to make the former sound less lethal? That’s a false equivalency. The novelty of the coronavirus could still potentially make it more dangerous.
Conclusion :-
When discussing current issues, there’s the potential for misinformation to be distributed. It’s already difficult to determine what’s true and what isn’t, but this can be mitigated by looking at a variety of sources. How do you determine whether your favorite speaker or media outlet is being fallacious? Look at their evidence (or lack thereof). Look at how they argued their point, and if it feels incomplete or does not follow, it may be fallacious. Give yourself some time to evaluate what a person is telling you, including the evidence they provide for their conclusion, rather than buying their point immediately just because it “sounds smart.”
It’s easy to make poor arguments, and it’s often just as easy to believe them.
Critical thinking and skepticism can be exhausting but fruitful in the quest for truth.
Thanks,
Daksh Parekh.
Is someone claiming that all Muslims are terrorists because a small group of them are? That’s a hasty generalization. Not all Muslims are terrorists, and a small few do not characterize the majority. Are they claiming that marriage has always been one man and one woman in this country? That’s an appeal to tradition. Just because something has always happened doesn’t mean it will or should continue to happen that way (see: slavery, racism). Are they claiming that one political party wants the country to fail because of their policy choices? That’s a strawman. A group favoring one policy choice you think will lead to bad consequences doesn’t mean they want to see the country fail. Are they equating the coronavirus to the flu to make the former sound less lethal? That’s a false equivalency. The novelty of the coronavirus could still potentially make it more dangerous.
Comments
Post a Comment