Week 7 - Fallacy

Week 7

Fallacy

            For this week lecture, I learn more about fallacy. This time, it’s all about fallacy. Just like what I mention for the week 6 post, fallacy is another type of bad arguments. The argument should be rejected as it so bad and it is typically unrepairable when it is a fallacious argument. There are also people saying that fallacy is a faulty argument that appears to be correct at first but when further examination is done, the argument turns out as false. The fallacies that I learn this week are Ad Hominem (attack), Ad Populum (manipulating emotions) and Petitio Principii (avoiding argument).

First I’m going to talk about Ad Hominem fallacy. In Latin, the word ad hominem means “at the man”. To my understanding, that means that you attacking “at the man” in attempt to people to believe in your premises. There are 3 types of Ad Hominem, which are Ad Hominem abusive, Ad Hominem circumstantial and Tu Quoque. For Ad Hominem abusive, it means that they are attacking the person’s CHARACTER. Ad Hominem circumstantial means they are attacking the other’s person’s CREDIBILITY. The last one, Tu Quoque, means they are ACCUSING the other’s person of having the same fault.

Next is about the Ad Populum Fallacies. With Ad Populum Fallacies, they always persuade people by manipulating emotions, hoping that the people will incline to agree with their argument. There are many types of Ad Populum. Ad Populum appeal to force/fear, to pity, to shame, to vanity, to authority, to ignorance, and to spite. I’m going only to talk about to force, to ignorance and to spite.

 Ad Populum appeal to force/fear also known as “scare tactics”. It uses threat or force in an attempt to accept a conclusion as correct. For Ad Populum appeal to ignorance, the arguer will treats LACK OF EVIDENCE as a reason to think that a claim is true or false. They will say that a claim is true because no one has proven it to be false or vice versa. Ad Populum appeal to spite also known as “Two wrongs make a right”. To make it understandable, it is just like it is right to revenge towards people because in the past they did bad things. Revenge is still wrong no matter what.

Lastly, it is Petitio Princpii. This happen when people avoiding talking about the argument. Sometimes, the premises are missing or the actual issues are side tracked by irrelevant issues. There are 3 types, which are begging the question, circular argument, and red herring. Begging the question means they are just repeating the same thing. For example, they said driving is dangerous because it is not safe. Next, circular argument assumes a premise of an argument had the same meaning as the conclusion. Last is red herring fallacy, An arguer tries to sidetrack his audience by raising an irrelevant issue and then claims that the original issue has been settled by the irrelevant diversion.