A WRITTEN REPORT ON “FALLACIES”

This written report is presented to

MA’AM JANNA CADALAY

In Partial Fulfillment of the

Requirement of the course
BUSINESS LOGIC
GEC 136 -A

GROUP 5
Presented by:
Marohom, Sohaima B.
Goling, Jehan
Mojahid, Haniya

May 27, 2024

Fallacies
- When the premises of an argument fail to support its conclusion and argument of that sort
may be called fallacious.
- Similarly, any mistake idea or false belief may sometimes be labeled “fallacious”.
- Is an error in reasoning, A false assumption or a bad arguments.

2 Major Categories of Fallacy

1. Formal Fallacy
A pattern of mistake that appears in deductive argument of specifiable form.

2. Informal Fallacy
A numerous and can therefore be best understood if they are grouped into categories,
each with clearly identifiable features. This classification of fallacies is a controversial
matter in logic.

Fallacies of relevance
R1: The appeal to the populace
- An appeal to popularity, it is defined more narrowly as the attempt to win popular
assent to a conclusion by arousing the feelings of the multitude.
Ex: Sixteen Million people voted for this president, that makes him the best president.

R2: The appeal to emotion

- One variety of the appeal to emotion that appears with great frequency is the
argument came from latin word ad misericordiam means “merciful heart”
Ex: Please give me a passing grade, my old poor parents are expecting me to graduate this
year!

R3: The red herring

- Is a fallacious argument whose effectiveness lies in distraction.
Ex: You’re right, that toy in the toy shop looks really fun. Let’s go home and see what fun
toys we have there!

R4: The straw man

- Argument is one argues against some view by presenting an opponent’s position as
one that is easily torn apart, the argument is fallacious.
- It is very much easier to win a fight against a person made of straw than against one
made of flesh and blood. If one argues against some view by presenting an opponent’s
position as one that is easily torn apart, the argument is fallacious.
Ex: You are you against death penalty? So, You think that the lives of murderers and
criminals are more important than the lives of their innocent victims?

R5: The attack on the person

Is one in which the thrust is directed, not at a conclusion, but at some person who defends the
conclusion in dispute.

2 major forms of the argument ad hominem

Abusive – one is tempted, in heated argument, to disparage the character of one’s opponents,
to deny their reasonableness, to question their understanding, or their seriousness, or even
their integrity
Ex: Of course it will be hard for you to understand why college education matters? You
always got the lowest score in our class!
Circumstantial – One who makes or rejects some claim have no more bearing on the truth of
what is claimed than does his character.
Ex: Oh for sure she is in favor of the anti-terror bill! She cannot be a good senator: she’s her
father’s daughter!

R6: The appeal to force

- It seems odd to suppose that one could hope to establish some proposition as true, or
persuade some other person of its truth, by resorting to force.
Ex: You are not force to follow this rule, but one must be prepared to face the consequence
though.

R7: Missing the point

- Is a mistaken refutation, A mistake that is made of seeking to refute another argument.
- Is a mistaken refutation, one that goes haywire because the person presenting it does
not fully understand the proposition in dispute. He refutes, or tries to refute, a claim
other than that which was originally at issue. He misses the point.
Ex: Somebody asked about the missing funds in an agency and you reply by pointing out how
employees enjoyed the perks and bonuses that they receive

Fallacies of defective induction

D1: The argument from ignorance
- Someone commits the fallacy argumentum ad ignorantiam if he or she argues that
something is true because it has not been proved false, or false because it has not been
proved true.
Ex: There is no need for digitization; our generation has survived on logbooks and
typewriters.

D2: The appeal to inappropriate authority

- This fallacy arises when the appeal is made to parties who have no legitimate claim to
authority in the matter at hand.
Ex: According to the governor suob is the best cure for covid-19, so, it must be true.

D3: False cause

- Occurs in someone incorrectly assumes that casual relation exists between two thing
or events.
- It is obvious that any reasoning that relies on treating as the cause of something or
event what is not really its cause must be seriously mistaken. Often, we are tempted to
suppose, or led to suppose, that we understand some specific cause and effect relation
when in fact we do not.
Ex: My business prospers, thanks to the money tree necklace that you gave me!

D4: Hasty generalization

- It is the fallacy we commit when we draw conclusions about all the persons or thing
in a given class on the basis of our knowledge about only one or only a very few of
the members of that class.
- Is statement made after considering just one or a few examples rather than relying on
more extensive research to back up the claim.
Ex: I was in the supermarket yesterday and I saw some shoppers, who are not wearing
facemasks, ahh! Filipinos are hardheaded! We have to blame them for rising covid-19 cases.

Fallacies of Presumption
P1: Accident
- Circumstances alter cases. A generalization that is largely true may not apply in a
given case or to some subcategory of cases for good reasons.
Ex: Birds can fly; therefore, emus must be able to fly too.

P2: Complex question

- One of the most common fallacies of presumption is to ask a question in such a way
as to presuppose the truth of some conclusion that is buried in the question.
Ex: Have you stopped beating your wife?

P3: Begging the question

- Occurs when an argument premises assume the truth of the conclusion, instead of
supporting it.
- The fallacy is widely misunderstood, partly because its name is misleading. It is the
mistake of assuming the truth of what one seeks to prove.
Ex: All Politician are corrupt because they’re in politics.

Fallacies of Ambiguity
A1: Equivocation
- Most words have more than one literal meaning, and most of the time we have no
difficulty keeping those meaning separate by noting the context and using our good
sense when reading and listening.
- Is a statement crafted to mislead or confuse readers or listeners by using multiple
meaning or interpretation of a word simply through unclear phrasing.
Ex: Ana went window shopping yesterday, when she came home not a window in sight.

A2: Amphiboly
- The fallacy amphiboly occurs when one is arguing from premises whose formulations
are ambiguous because of their grammatical construction.
- Is a type of informal common fallacy that involves grammatical ambiguity.
Ex: I shot an elephant in my pajamas.

A3: Accent
- The shift is the result of a change in emphasis on a single word or phrase, whose
meaning does not change. When the premise of an argument relies on one possible
emphasis but a conclusion drawn from it relies on the meaning of the same words
emphasized differently.
- When the meaning of the word, sentence or entire idea is interpreted differently by
changing where the accent falls.
Ex: Tayo na.

A4: Composition
- As reasoning fallaciously from the attributes of the parts of a whole to the attributes of
the whole itself. Infers that something is true of a part is true of a whole.
- Describe as reasoning fallaciously from the attributes of the parts of a whole to the
attributes of the whole itself.
Ex: The every part of a certain machine is light in weight, the machine “as a whole” is light in
weight.

A5: Division
- This fallacy is simply the reverse of the fallacy of composition. In it the same
confusion is present but the inference proceeds in the opposite direction.
- Arguing fallaciously that what is true of a whole must also be true of its parts.
Ex: You came from a family of doctors and intellectual, surely you can do better in this.