PHL Flashcards
(39 cards)
Hasty generalization (from too few cases)
arriving at a general statement or rule based on a sample that is too small.
Argument by anecdote
taking a story about one case (or a small number) and drawing a unwarranted conclusion about it.
Fallacy of the small sample
making a claim about the general population from a tiny sample.
Generalizing from exceptional cases
arriving at a conclusion (generalization) based on a case that is in some way exceptional.
Fallacy of biased sample
arriving at a conclusion (generalization) based ona sample that is skewed in some way.
Fallacy of accident
When a speaker assumes that a general statement automatically applies to a specific case (that might very well be exceptional); also called the “fallacy of the general rule” and “destoring the exception.”
Fallacy of weak analogy
an argument that draws a conclusion based on unimportant or debatable similarities between two things.
Mistaken appeal to authority
When the speaker argues that you should believe a conclusion since it comes from a nonauthoritive source.
Mistaken appeal to popularity
Arguing that public opinion about a matter us sufficent evidence in favor (or against) it.
Mistaken appeal to common practice
arguing that a practice is justified because most people engage in it.
Bandwagon fallacy
when a speaker tries to motivate the audience to go along with something so that they can be like everyone else (to go along with the crowd). This is the type of appeal to popularity that is more based on the psychological or emotional appeal of wanting to belong.
Post hoc, egro propter hoc
“After this, therefore, because of it.” This is when a speaker assumes that the fact that one event came after another establishes that it was caused by it.
Cum hoc, ergo propter hoc
“with this, therefore because of it.” When a speaker assumes that because two things happened at the same time, one thing must have caused the other.
Slippery Slope
making an argument based on a warning that if you do one thing it will necessarily lead to some other (undesirable) thing without offering support for the claim that this progression will actually occur.
Untestable Explanation
offering as proof a contention that could not possibly be tested.
Formal fallacies
mistakes in reasoning that are due to the formal structure of the argument.
Affirming the Consequent
If P then Q.
Q.
Therefore, P.
If Eli went trick or treating, then Eli received candy.
Eli received candy.
Therefore, Eli went trick or treating.
Denying the Antecedent
If P then Q.
Not-P.
Therefore, not-Q.
If Marcy ate pine nuts, then Marcy got sick.
Marcy didn’t eat pine nuts.
Therefore, Marcy didn’t get sick.
Fallacy of the Undistributed Middle
Occurs when a speaker assumes that two things related to a third thing are also related to each other.
This fallacy takes many forms, including:
All X are Y. All trees are plants.
All Z are Y. All flowers are plants.
Therefore, all X are Z. Therefore, all trees are flowers.
Equivocation
an argument in which a word or phrase is used in two different ways within the same argument (related to semantic ambiguity)
Amphilboly
When an argument is flawed because it relies on a syntactic ambiguity (ambiguity due to the structure of the sentence).
Fallacy of Composition
Fallacy that occurs when someone believes that a feature that applies to some part of a thing can also be attributed to the thing as a whole.
Fallacy of Division
When a speaker assumes that what is true of a group of things taken collectively must also be true of those same things taken as individuals (or assumes that what is true of a whole is true of its parts).
Confusing explanation with excuses
when someone offers an explanation instead of providing an excuse or justification.
