Name
Professor’s Name
Course No
Date
Logical Fallacies
Fallacies are faults within an argument that makes a statement or claim invalid. Fallacies derive from incorrect logical reasoning that weakens a particular case. Errors can be either formal or informal. A formal fallacy or deductive fallacy occurs when there is a fault in the logical structure of a specific argument. A standard error, on the other hand, derives from incorrect reasoning in a faulty case. Fallacious arguments are hard to detect because of their persuasiveness to a casual reader or audience. Besides, false statements are joint in newspapers and advertisements and thus, can influence the readers to accept specific arguments or claims. Yet, there are harmful fallacious arguments that can taint the image of those making the particular claim.
The bandwagon fallacy occurs when a significant group of people believes a particular proposition to be correct and thus making a claim accurate. In a straw man fallacy, the famous members strive to validate a specific statement even when there is little or no evidence to support the claims. Bandwagon fallacies are common in advertisements, and an example is the Colgate ad, whereby dentists claim that the toothpaste brand has the best results compared to other brands. These fallacies are compelling to the audience and thus influence their toothpaste preferences to the extent of raising discussions with other people over which brand is the best.
The appeal to authority fallacy occurs when individuals rely on a particular authoritative figure’s opinion, especially in the attempt to validate an argument contrary to the field of expertise. The appeal to authority fallacies is, in most instances, political whereby individuals get a political figure to back their arguments. The audience, therefore, believes the statements made by the leaders because of the political influence. Besides, the appeal to authority fallacies is universal in the workplace, where subordinate staff strives to use a particular strategy just because the top management officials agree that it is the appropriate approach. However, these fallacies can be harmful, especially when followers of a specific political faction disagree with other people’s opinions. Most cases of political violence result from fallacious arguments made by opponent leaders.
The anecdotal evidence fallacy occurs when individuals use their experience to draw conclusions or arguments. Statements that depend heavily on empirical facts tend to ignore the possibility of such experiences being insufficient in proving a particular premise. These fallacies can be catastrophic, especially in the decision-making process. In businesses, employers relying heavily on experience while making vital decisions can make erroneous mistakes risking the company. For example, CEOs can decide to use a particular strategy just because their competitors or clients incorporated it in their business.
Lastly, the hasty generalization fallacy occurs when individuals infer broad conclusions based on insufficient facts supporting the claims. Therefore, individuals conclude a particular argument with little evidence. These fallacies are popular in political and economic sectors where leaders strive to make a general conclusion owing to the little information they possess about the claim. An example is when presidential candidates make adverse comments about their opponents based on their assumptions about them. In conclusion, the appeal to authority fallacy and the hasty generalization fallacies have the potential to create conflicts. Politicians or executives adopting these fallacies can make erroneous decisions that can directly cause harm to the followers and clients.