Fallacies can be defined as mistaken beliefs based on unsound arguments. They are defects that weaken arguments. They arise from logically incorrect reasoning, therefore undermining the validity of an argument. Most academic writers dealing on this subject insist on the argument conception of fallacies rather than the belief conception that is common in non-scholarly discourse. Sound reasoning has been associated with the ability to detect and avoid fallacies. Fallacies knowledge is required to arm people against the most enticing missteps they might take during arguments. It is essential to realize some two facts about fallacies; first, fallacious arguments are common and can be quite persuasive to the casual reader or listener. Second, it is quite hard to tell whether an argument is fallacious or not. An argument can be either very weak, somehow weak, somehow strong or very strong. A dispute with several stages and parts might have some vulnerable sections and some strong ones. Fallacies are difficult to classify because of their variety in application and structure. This paper discusses the various types of fallacies and their examples.
Fallacies are divided into two categories, formal and informal fallacies. Formal fallacies or deductive fallacies occur when the conclusion does not follow the premise. Such fallacies are easily identified as instances of invalid logical forms like undistributed middle and denying the antecedent. The pattern of reasoning in formal fallacies seems logical yet is usually wrong. A formal model regularly follows the pattern: All cats have legs; Bingo is a cat; therefore, Bingo has legs.
Formal fallacies are divided into several categories. The first category is an appeal to probability, which involves a statement that takes something for granted because it is possible. For example, I see a dark cloud in the sky. Dark clouds mean rain. It is going to rain today. Second, there is the bad reasons fallacy where a conclusion is assumed to be wrong due to bad arguments. An example of such fallacy is: Her new girlfriend owns a mansion. She must be rich. He should break up with her. Again, the masked man fallacy or intentional fallacy involves the substitution of parties. When the two interchanged things are identical, then an argument is said to be valid. For instance: David’s investigator reported that a man wearing a white hat was having breakfast with his fiancée. David’s best friend, Leonard, wears a white hat. Hence, Leonard is having an affair with David’s fiancée. The last example of a formal fallacy is a non sequitur. This fallacy involves making a conclusion that does not follow from the propositions. For instance: I read about a wolf attack. My neighbour owns a wolf. My life is in absolute danger.
Informal fallacies, also known as inductive, occur due to a reasoning error. Unlike formal fallacies that are identified by examining the claim or statement, informal fallacies can be identified by analyzing premise’s content or supporting evidence. In this case, the account is not supported by enough reasons to demand acceptance. A strong informal argument follows this pattern: The sun has not exploded since the beginning of the world. The sun will not explode today.
There are several types of informal fallacies such that they are divided into subcategories. The first category involves the fallacies of presumption. Fallacious reasoning may arise from the presumption of truth without evidence. Fallacies of presumption are then broken down into various types. First, there is the complex question fallacy that consists of questionable assumptions. For example, in the question, are you going to admit that you lied, answering yes implies that the individual is wrong. Answering no also means that the person is wrong but is not ready to accept. In other words, the question presumes guilt either way. Then there is also the hasty generalization fallacy, which is based on an abnormal situation. For instance: Osama Bin Laden was a Muslim. I do not trust any Muslim. Again, the post hoc, ergo propter hoc, is based on cause and effect assumptions. For example, every time I wash my clothes, it rains. The slippery slope fallacy involves falsely assuming the consequences of some actions. For instance: If the children are allowed to choose the TV stations they watch now, they will expect to select their hospitals and schools. There is also the sweeping generalization fallacy that involves applying a general rule to a particular instance. For example, using purple mangosteen is useful in preventing cancer, so everyone should eat five pieces of purple mangosteen daily. Appeal to ignorance is prevalent in everyday conversations, politics and advertising and assumes that a proposition is correct since it has not yet been proven to be false. For instance, no one has been able to prove the existence of God; as a result, there is no God. The last type is the false dilemma, which occurs when a person presents their argument in a way that only two possible options exist. For example, if you do not vote for Donald Trump, you must be a democrat.
The second subcategory involves the fallacies of ambiguity. Fallacies can also be caused by words misunderstanding and lack of clarity. An example of this is the accent fallacy, which is based on word stress and emphasis or unclear word parts. For instance, in the sentence, I did not eat the bacon yesterday, which may imply that someone else ate the bacon, or I ate the bacon another day. Then, the equivocation fallacies occur when words with different meanings are used numerous times. For instance, Faith, my cousin, has a strong faith in God. Finally, the straw man fallacies consist of misrepresentations that make arguments look weak. For instance, a mother tells her son that he will not eat the dessert until he is done with the chicken and vegetables. The son then thinks his mom only loves him when he eats.
The final category involves the fallacies of relevance, which try to convince people through the use of irrelevant information that appeals more to emotions rather than logic. The first type under this category is the appeal to authority fallacy, where an argument is attached with a person with authority to provide credibility to a claim. For instance, a Christian boy argues that drinking alcohol is wrong and cites a bible verse read at his church. The second type is the appeal to popular opinion. In this case, the individual claims that a belief or idea is true just because most people believe that. For example, most people have read this book, so it must be engaging. Then, attacking the person fallacy is quite common and refers to individuals who substitute a refutation with an insult. For example, do not listen to the senator’s advice because he failed most of his university exams. The gambler’s fallacy assumes that short term changes will correct themselves. For example, he picked the spade card eight times in a row, so he will probably choose the heart the next time. Genetic fallacy, on the other hand, includes the rejection or acceptance of ideas based on their sources rather than merit. For example, you hurt my friend, so I am not playing with you.
There are different types of fallacies, as discussed above. While the formal fallacies are simple, the informal fallacies are quite complicated due to the various subcategories under them. Understanding these types of fallacies makes it easy to identify such logic lapses immediately. As a result, it is easy to make persuasive arguments that are unquestionable.