Fallacies of Argument
“Argumentative moves flawed by their very
nature or structure” (Lunsford 75)
Fallacies of Emotional Argument
• Scare tactics
• Either/or choices
• Slippery slope
• Overly sentimental appeals
• Bandwagon appeals
Scare tactics
• Used to turn legitimate concerns into panic or
prejudice
• Fear causes people to act or think irrationally
• People may stop listening
WPA poster, 1930s
Either/Or Choices
• Overly simplify complicated issues
• Used to obscure legitimate alternatives
Slippery Slope
• Portrays today’s small misstep into tomorrow’s slide into disaster
• Exaggerates the likely consequences of an action, which usually causes
fear
Overly Sentimental Appeals
• Use tender emotions excessively to distract attention away from facts
• Can make people feel guilty for challenging an idea, a policy, or proposal
Bandwagon Appeals
• Urge people to follow the same path everyone else
is taking
• Bandwagon tactics permit the suspension of
judgement
Fallacies of Ethical Argument
• Appeals to false authority
• Dogmatism
• Ad Hominem arguments
• Stacking the deck
Appeals to False Authority
• When writers offer themselves or other authorities as sufficient
warrant for believing a claim
• Claim: X is true because I say so. Warrant: What I say must be true.
• Claim: X is true because Y says so. Warrant: What Y says must be true.
Dogmatism
• An assertion or assumption that a
particular position is the only one that
is possibly acceptable
• A fallacy of character that
undermines the trust that must exist
between those who make and listen
arguments
Ad Hominem Arguments
• Attack the character of a person rather than the claims he or she is
making
• Destroying an opponent’s credibility distracts from any successful
arguments they may be making
Stacking the Deck
• Showing only one side of the story
• Stories that are highly selective in their coverage
• Leave out other sides of the argument
• Sometimes can become confirmation of bias
Fallacies of Logical Argument
• Hasty generalization
• Faulty causality
• Begging the question
• Equivocation
• Non-sequitur
• Straw man
• Red Herring
• Faulty Analogy
Hasty Generalization
• An inference drawn from insufficient evidence
• Forms the basis for most stereotypes about people or institutions
Faulty Causality
• Post hoc, ergo propter hoc : “after this, and therefore because of this”
Begging the Question
• A claim is made on grounds that can’t be accepted because the grounds themselves
are in question
• Circular argument: the conclusion appears at both the beginning and end of the
argument
• Assumes the truth of the conclusion instead of supporting it
Claim: Representative X can’t be guilty of accepting bribes….
Reason: ….because he’s an honest person.
Warrant: An honest person cannot be guilty of accepting bribes.
Equivocation
• Half truths or arguments that give lies an honest appearance
• Usually based on tricks of language
• “Motte and Bailey Fallacy” conflates 2 positions, advances the extreme
position and, when attacked, reverts to the more modest position
Non Sequitur
• An argument whose claims, reasons, or warrants don’t connect logically
Straw Man
• Attack arguments that no one is really making or portray opponents’
positions as more extreme or less coherent than they are
• Sets up an argument that is easier to knock down
• “My opponent would like you to believe….”
• “So what you’re saying is…”
Red Herring
• Designed to throw someone off the trail
• Changes the subject abruptly or introduces a claim or fact that is
irrelevant
Faulty Analogy
• Inaccurate or inconsequential comparisons between objects or concepts
General Advice
• Approach your writing with a certain amount of objectivity.
• Rein yourself in. Don’t lose control of your argument.
• Examine the logic behind all your claims.
• When reading or viewing other arguments, investigate the motive behind
the reasoning.
• Make sure you fully understand someone else’s argument before
attacking it.
• When in doubt, return to your research.
References and Further Reading
• Lunsford, Andrea A. and Ruszkiewicz, John J. “Fallacies of Argument.” A
Writer’s Reference 9th Ed, edited by Nancy Sommers and Diana
Hacker, Macmillan, 2019, pp. 75-87.
• Nordquist, Richard. “What is a Logical Fallacy?” Thought.co, 25 July
2019, https://www.thoughtco.com/what-is-logical-fallacy-1691259.
• Purdue Writing Lab. “Fallacies.” Purdue Writing Lab,
https://owl.purdue.edu/owl/general_writing/academic_writing/logic_in_a
rgumentative_writing/fallacies.html.
