Logical Fallacies, Or How to Change the Subject to Win an Argument

Our next subject in class will be logical fallacies. A logical fallacy, used knowingly or not, is basically a sneaky way to win an argument regardless of its validity or truth. In some way the fallacy changes the subject, making you react or assent to something irrelevant.

Alchin lists fifteen fallacies, which are all relevant but also a lot to remember. Some of the more common would be:

1. Ad hominem
2. Hasty generalization
3. Appeal to authority
4. Appeal to common practice
5. Straw man
6. False dilemma
7. Ad bacculum
8. Post hoc ergo propter hoc

We will discuss these in class for they are encountered often in daily life. For example, when someone, or a small group of people, begins or repeats a vicious rumor to discredit someone in the community, this is a form of ad hominem argument. This can be accompanied by mobbing, the intentional exclusion of a person from activities or discussion (but this last phenomenom is not a logical fallacy). Or, for another example, when someone is caught cheating or stealing, but claims that it is ok because everyone does it, this is the fallacy of common practice. At election time many fallacies will come into complex and bewildering play, as newspapers and television networks crackle with personal attacks on politicians, and policies are caricatured to provoke a response from the voters. Lastly, when someone says or does something unpopular, and threats are used to intimidate and silence him or her, they are often phrased with an ad bacculum fallacy. "You should be careful about what you say."