LESSON 2:

FALLACIES
How does logic help in finding the truth?
◦Logic comes from the Greek word logos, which
means order, sense, or coherence. For the
ancient Greeks, anything that is logical is also
rational, and vice versa. Logic is the science of
correct thinking and reasoning. It helps us know
which arguments make sense and which do not.
Fallacy

◦It refers to errors of reasoning. It

also refers to arguments which fail to
establish firm foundations for their
respective conclusions.
 2 TYPES OF FALLACIES
1.Formal Logic – This checks if an argument follows
proper logical rules or structure, like math or a formula.
Even if the topic is strange, if the structure is correct, it's
still valid.

2.Informal Logic – This looks at the content or meaning

of the argument. It focuses on errors in reasoning (called
fallacies) that happen in everyday speech or writing,
even if the structure seems fine.
 2 TYPES OF FALLACIES
2. Informal Logic (Fallacy):

He's wrong because he's not rich.

❌ This attacks the person, not the idea — a fallacy in

content.
 2 TYPES OF FALLACIES
In short:

Formal = structure matters

Informal = meaning and reasoning matter

 A. FALLACIES OF RELEVANCE
The fallacies of relevance are traditionally known as ignoratio
elenchi (ignorance of what is needed to establish a conclusion).
These fallacies share a common characteristic of presenting
irrelevant premises contributing to the inadmissibility of a
conclusion.
ARGUMENTUM AD MISERICORDIAM (Appeal to
pity/Emotion)
◦happens when someone tries to win an argument
by making others feel sorry for them, instead of
giving real evidence or reasons.

◦Instead of proving the point, they focus on their

sad story or emotions to make you agree.
Example:
◦Student to teacher:
◦“Please give me a passing grade. If I fail this
subject, my parents will get mad at me and I’ll cry
every night.”
◦Job applicant:
◦“I really need this job. My family is poor and we
have no food.”
 Argumentum Ad Hominem (Appeal to Character or
Argument Against the Person)

◦Attacking the person presenting the argument nstead of the

argument itself.
◦This can happen by verbally abusing (ad hominem abusive) the
opponent or by alluding to certain circumstances (ad hominem
circumstantial) that affect the opponent. The fallacy might as
well be committed by the arguer whose person is being
attacked if he returns the attack in the same manner (tu
quoque, “you too”).
Example:
◦ Arguer 1: Smoking should be banned in all public places.
◦ Arguer 2: There is no way you can convince me with what you are saying because
you yourself smoke a lot and at all places! (abusive)
◦ Arguer 1: Banning in public places can prevent non-smokers from inhaling second-
hand smoke which is proven to be more dangerous than first-hand smoke.
◦ Arguer 2: I have known that your children are enrolled in a school where all the
teachers are chain smokers. Naturally you speak that way because you want to
protect your children! (circumstantial)
◦ Arguer 1: I know you would reject my proposal because you are afraid your
business will go down. I am fully aware that your grocery store situated in front of a
school profits so much from cigarettes. You are very selfish and thinking only of
yourself! (“you too”)
 Argumentum Ad Populum (Appeal to People)

This fallacy occurs when a proposition is characterized by

an appeal to popular opinions or sentiments. The fallacy
can occur in several ways and one of which is when a
proposition is claimed to be true because most, if not all,
people believe it to be true.
"Tide Ultra is better than Surf because many Filipinos use it."
Argues Tide Ultra’s superiority because of popularity, not quality.

"Everyone is buying this phone, so it must be the best!"

Popularity used as proof of superiority.

 Argumentum Ad Baculum (Appeal to Force)
Is a logical fallacy where someone tries to get
acceptance of a conclusion by threatening harm,
punishment, or negative consequences instead of
giving good reasons or evidence.
It appeals to fear or intimidation rather than rational
argument.
Example 1:
◦Employee to Boss: “I deserve a raise in salary. Just to
remind you of what I know about you and your secretary. I
am very much aware of your activities after office hours.
Besides, your wife and I are best friends so it will only take a
cup of coffee for her to know everything.”
◦Example 2:
◦Girl to boy: “If you will not marry me then I will not think
twice about taking my own life!”
Argumentum Ad Verecundiam (Appeal to
Wrong Authority)
Is a logical fallacy where someone claims that a
statement is true simply because an authority or
expert said so—but the authority cited is not actually
qualified in the relevant field or no other evidence is
given to support the claim.
◦Example:
◦Arguer: “Attorney A, the famous lawyer, has stated that upbringing
of children necessitates proper healthcare which means a good
supply of vitamins, dental care, regular visits to clinic and a balanced
intake of nutritious food. In view of his expertise as a lawyer, we
must conclude that it is indeed true.”
Ad Ignorantiam (Appeal to Ignorance)

Is a logical fallacy where a claim is said to be

true or false simply because there is no
evidence proving otherwise.
In other words, it wrongly assumes that a lack
of evidence against a proposition is evidence
that the proposition is true, or vice versa.
Ad Ignorantiam (Appeal to Ignorance)

Is a logical fallacy where a claim is said to be

true or false simply because there is no
evidence proving otherwise.
In other words, it wrongly assumes that a lack
of evidence against a proposition is evidence
that the proposition is true, or vice versa.
Ad Ignorantiam (Appeal to Ignorance)
It happens when someone argues:
“X must be true because no one has proven X is
false,” or
“X must be false because no one has proven X
is true.”
Ad Ignorantiam (Appeal to Ignorance)
“Since you can’t prove my innocence, you must
assume I’m guilty.”
The burden is on the accuser to prove guilt, not the
accused to prove innocence.
“You can’t prove that ghosts exist, so ghosts
must not be real.”
Absence of proof for ghosts is not proof of their
nonexistence.
 2 TYPES OF FALLACIES
1.Formal Logic:

All humans are mortal.

Socrates is a human.
Therefore, Socrates is mortal.

✅ This follows proper structure.

Non Sequitur
◦is a logical fallacy where the conclusion does not logically
follow from the premises or evidence given. The Latin term
means “it does not follow,” highlighting that there is a gap or
disconnect between what is stated and what is concluded.
◦Example:
◦Arguer: The sky is blue, therefore I love you!
◦“I own a car. Therefore, I must own a house.”
◦Owning a car doesn’t logically imply owning a house.
Use of Flattery

◦The fallacy is committed when one attempts to persuade others by

engaging in excessive praise of people instead of presenting
evidence for one’s view.
Logical form:
◦X is true.
◦And by the way, you are so smart/beautiful/wise, etc.
◦Therefore, X is true.
Use of Flattery

◦Salesperson:
◦“You look at least ten years younger when you drive this car
— you should definitely buy it!”
◦Uses flattery about appearance to persuade, instead of facts
about the car’s quality or price.
B. FALLACIES OF SUFFICIENCY
◦Fallacies of insufficient evidence occur not in the same manner as
fallacies of relevance, and that they do not produce the same
impact on a conclusion:
◦Fallacies of relevance would rather render a conclusion
inadmissible because of premises that are logically irrelevant
while fallacies of insufficient evidence will only weaken a
conclusion because of premise/evidence that is not adequate
enough to fully support it.
Hasty Generalization

◦The fallacy occurs when a conclusion concerning all the

members of a group is drawn from evidence that pertains
to a selected or limited sample.
◦A limited sample is not representative of the whole, which
is also in conformity with the Aristotelian square of
opposition where the truth of the universal implies the
truth of the particular, but not the other way around.
Hasty Generalization

Example:
◦Arguer: “Two weeks ago Mr. Masungit was accused of
stealing the cell phone of his seatmate. Just this morning,
Mr. Masungit was seen extending his arm towards the
pocket of another student. Clearly, he is someone to be
feared of and should be avoided.”
Accident

◦The fallacy is committed when a general rule is applied

to a particular situation. It should be noted that the fallacy
does not consist of arguing from a generalization to
specific instance of that generalization, rather, it is
arguing from a generalization to a special case.
Accident
Example:
◦Arguer: “While it is a crime to physically abuse someone, it is
obvious that Manny Pacquiao is a criminal because he physically
attacks his opponents during bouts.”
◦(Physical attack is accidental to the profession of Manny Pacquiao
as a boxer, which would render the general rule concerning physical
abuse inapplicable)
False Cause
◦The fallacy occurs when a premise contains an affirmation of the
belief that a particular situation is always caused by another
situation.
◦The fallacy may occur in different forms:
◦post hoc ergo propter hoc (“after this, therefore on account of
this”), presupposes that just because one event precedes another
event the first event causes the second event;
◦non causa pro causa (“not the cause for the cause’), when an
effect is taken mistakenly as the cause.
◦Example 1: (post hoc ergo)

Arguer: “Every time I bring an umbrella with me it would not rain and
if I do not bring an umbrella it would rain. Therefore, I will always bring
my umbrella so it will not rain.”
Example 2: (non causa pro causa)

“I ate a specific food, and then got sick”

◦Arguer:

◦Therefore the food made me sick

(Without evidence of a causal link)

False Dichotomy

◦The fallacy is also referred to as the “either or fallacy”.

◦It is committed when the premise of an argument contains two
usually extreme alternatives thereby creating the impression that
there is no more room for any other alternative.
◦Usually the arguer intends to force the listener into accepting the
alternative which is favorable (to the arguer), the listener, then,
would have no choice but to accept unless he could risk accepting
the undesirable one.
◦Example:
◦Mother to child: “Either you will enroll in St. Louis
University or forget about acquiring a college degree! I
graduated from that university then it must be the right
place for you!”
Weak Analogy

◦Even though it is generally accepted that analogy is a way to

explain or clarify a point in a discussion or conversation for it
brings out similarities of two situations (one situation illuminating
another situation), it can not fully support a conclusion of an
argument, that is, two or more things maybe similar in some
respects but it does not follow that they can still be similar in other
respects.
◦If a conclusion is dependent entirely on an analogy then it is to be
considered weak.
Weak Analogy

◦Example:
◦Arguer: “Having a wife is like owning a kite and letting it
fly. You let her go wherever she wishes and do whatever
she wants but you are still in control. Imagine a kite
without a rope to control it. It will surely fly freely and
most probably, disappear forever, and so with your wife.”
Suppressed Evidence

◦The fallacy is committed whenever an arguer presents evidence in

support of one conclusion, or one side of the issue, while ignoring or
suppressing evidence that would support another conclusion.
◦Usually, this fallacy is committed consciously by salesmen whose
intention is to convince potential customers into buying their
products.
Suppressed Evidence

◦Example:
◦Landlady: “I have one of the best apartment units in this area of the
city. They are regularly maintained, and potential tenants are usually
screened as to their behaviors and characters. Surely, you will like
having one of the units.”
◦(The landlady may have ignored or intentionally suppressed other
matters like problems concerning supply of water and electricity, or
that there is an obligatory monthly increase)
Begging the Question:

◦There are several ways of committing this fallacy but

common to these possibilities is the failure to ask a
question or set of questions before attempting to arrive at
a conclusion. Because of the absence or intentional
omission of the question/s wrong conclusions due to
confusion is deemed likely to occur.
Begging the Question:

The policy is effective because it works, and we

know it works because it’s effective.
a. Complex Question

◦This form of “begging the question fallacy” occurs when an arguer

poses a question that presupposes an answer that is meant for a
question that has not been asked.
◦Example:
Why do you hate your boss so muh?
b. Assuming Too Much
◦This form occurs when a “questionable” premise is presented to
support a conclusion. The premise is usually a generalization, or “too
much of an assumption” about a subject. A prominent indicator of
this fallacy is the quantifier “all”.
◦Example:
◦Arguer: “All men are polygamous. A is a man. Therefore, A is
polygamous.”
◦(The first premise begs the question, “How does the arguer arrive at
the assumption that all men are polygamous?”)
c. Circular Argument (petitio principii)
◦The fallacy occurs when someone is arguing in circles, that is, he
uses the conclusion to support the premise in the same way that he
uses that same premise to prove the validity of that same
conclusion. It can also be observed that in such a case the
proposition is affirmed twice resulting to nothing but deception or
confusion. In short, it begs the practical question, “What, or where, is
the point?”
◦Example:
◦Arguer: “Our teacher is insane because he is crazy, and he is crazy
because he is insane.”
Fallacy of Novelty

◦It takes place when assuming that a new idea, law,

policy, or action is better simply because it is new.
◦Example:
◦Arguer: “Better Taste Restaurant is now under new
management. I’m sure the foods being offered there are
now much cheaper and more delicious than before.”
C. FALLACIES OF EXPRESSION
1. Equivocation
◦The fallacy is committed when a single term is used with two or more
meanings in the same argument.
◦It consists of the use of word that has the same spelling or sound but
the meaning is different in the different parts of the inference.
◦It operates in using a term in a premise with the intention of tricking
the person in accepting the terms as though it’s a natural part of the
argument.
Examples:
◦a. Jasmin is a flower. My little baby is Jasmin. Therefore,
My little baby is a flower.
◦b. A paper is light. What is light cannot be dark.
Therefore a paper cannot be dark.
2. Amphiboly

◦The fallacy involves the use of sentences which can be interpreted in

multiple ways with equal justification. Also known as “Fallacy of
Ambiguity,” this fallacy is committed when there is an ambiguous use of
a phrase or a sentence.
◦Examples:
◦a. The female student said to her male teacher, “Sir go out.” Is she
asking permission that she will go out? Or trying to command or tell her
teacher that he will go out?
◦b. She is cold.
3. Composition

◦The fallacy is committed when one assumes that what

holds true of the individuals also holds true of the group.
◦Example:
◦The human body is made up of cells which are invisible
to the naked eye. Therefore, the human body is invisible.
4. Division

◦The fallacy is committed when one assumes that what

holds true of a group automatically holds true of all the
individuals in that group.
◦Example:
◦All human beings are conscious entities. Therefore, the
cells in our bodies are conscious entities.
5. Accent
◦The fallacy is committed when one changes the stress in
the statement, thereby creating a misunderstanding or
confusion to the listener.
◦Examples:
◦a. No U-turn.
◦b. I resent her question.
◦c. Woman without her man is lost.