Fallacies are statements that really don't make any sense, but are sometimes convincing because of emotional appeal or because the conclusion is one that a person might agree with and so that person is uncritical of how they got there.
Skeptics should avoid using fallacies in their own reasoning and speech for a number of reasons:
Fallacies are almost always dishonest.
Fallacies might appeal to the already convinced, but typically won't convince anyone else.
Almost anyone that realizes that you've used a fallacy will take the use of a fallacy as a sign of sloppy thinking or attempted trickery and you will then lose credibility in their eyes.
Appeal to consequencesAppeal to consequences asserts that something must be true, because otherwise the consequences are horrible. Unfortunately, sometimes life is horrible, so this reasoning is incorrect.
Examples:
“People in the human statue condition can't be conscious. The alternative is simply unthinkable”.“Doing all the intricate parenting things I've done must make a difference, otherwise I've wasted my time.”“Boys and girls must be equally smart as one another, otherwise gender discrimination is defendable.”Things like “
stop smoking or you may get lung cancer” or “living a life filled with chaos will probably lead to a bad end” are not appeal to consequences fallacies.
Showing that the idea leads to a contradiction is also not a fallacy.“All generalizations are false.” is self contradicting and it is valid to then take the consequence of that contradiction to be that there must be some true generalizations.
Appeal to the massesAppeal to the masses justifies something on the basis that it is widely thought to be true. It was once widely thought that the world was flat, this didn't make it so.
Example:
“We should have a vote on whether the was a holocaust or not. The result of that vote will tell us the real deal and should be what put in text books.”Appeal to traditionAppeal to tradition is very similar to appeal to the masses. It proposes that something that was always done a certain way was done that way it was for a good reason, even if the good reason is no longer apparent. Sometimes things are widely done for terrible reasons. Sometimes things are widely done for a good reason but that good reason no longer persists.
Example:
For thousands of years people thought that the Earth was flat. Why should we fly in the face of all that combined wisdom?Appeal to forceAppeal to force insists that someone believe something not because the facts back it up but because there is an “or else” involved. Living in the Soviet Union at one time could involve be required to believe that communism worked, because believing something else and saying so could have dire consequences.
Example:
“If you don't believe in Santa Claus, you won't get a present on Christmas Eve.”A command is not the fallacy of an appeal to force. Saying “Stop or I'll shoot” isn't a fallacy at all and so is not the fallacy of an appeal to force.
Appeal to authorityAppeal to authority attempts to substitute the authority of a person for the final test of idea, which are the facts. Expert authority is fine, as long as there is process of verifying the integrity of what he says.
Example:
“I believe the Bermuda triangle is an interdimensional vortex, because I read a book all about the Bermuda triangle and that book said it was.”EquivocationEquivocation is one of the rarer fallacies. It uses a word that has multiple means to sneak a conclusion that is unjustified.
Example:
Redheads are not normal, and so should be institutionalised. Hasty GeneralizationOrdinary generalization is key to science. A hasty generalization is where someone jumps to a conclusion based on too small of set of cases.
Examples:
We found an educational toy that was able to allow a particular girl to gain three grades of reading level withing a couple of months. We should buy hundreds of these, so that every student can benefit like that.
I dated a blonde and she was a terrible girlfriend. Blondes just aren't worth it.
False DichotomyAlso called a false choice or a false dilemma. A dichotomy is something split into two categories. A false dichotomy is where that division is not justified because of other cases or because of “shades of gray” between the extremes.
Example:
“You are either having a good time or you're not. Which is it?”
“Girls are either girlie girls or tomboys. One or the other.”
Ad HominemAn ad hominem attack avoids the issue at hand and attempts to discredit the person, usually with some kind of smear to their character.
Example:
“Your brother said that you got a speeding ticket.” “He would say that, he's always been jealous of me.” "You claim that this man is innocent, but you cannot be trusted since you are a criminal as well."
(from Wikipedia: Ad Hominem)If someone is a notorious liar, then that is a basis for discounting what they say, if there is no other way to verify it.
Straw ManA straw man argument uses a lame version of the opponents argument, shows that that argument is in fact lame and then claims victory over what is claimed to be the opponents argument, but really isn't.
The name comes from the idea of dressing a straw man (a scarecrow) in one's opponent's clothes, knocking it down and then celebrating the false victory.
It's very typical to take an extreme view that fringe elements might have and pretend like that is the majority view.
There is often an ad hominem attack implied since usually only a dumb person or a crazy person would actually take the position that the opponent says they take. Sometimes this actually becomes something that is convincing to people, based on their need for the opposition to be deliberately marginalized.
(From
Wikipedia, Straw Man:)
One can set up a straw man in the following ways:
1. Present the opponent's argument in weakened form, refute it, and pretend that the original has been refuted.
2. Present a misrepresentation of the opponent's position, refute it, and pretend that the opponent's actual position has been refuted.
3. Present someone who defends a position poorly as the defender, refute that person's arguments, and pretend that every upholder of that position, and thus the position itself, has been defeated.
4. Invent a fictitious persona with actions or beliefs that are criticized, and pretend that the person represents a group of whom the speaker is critical.
An example of the Straw Man technique would be:
Debater A: "I don't think that children should play out in the busy streets."Debater B: "I think it's very cruel to deny children their freedom to play out of doors, or to go wherever they please. Children should not be kept locked-up in their own homes as my opponent suggests."Slippery SlopeA slippery slope argument (also called a “parade of horrors”) usually has the form that if something is allowed then something slightly bad will happen, which will lead to something worse and finally to disaster. The inevitability of the chain of events isn't established, it's merely the emotional resonance of the final threat of the slippery slope that is used to attempt to convince people.
Example:
“If you let your teenage daughter go out on dates the next thing you know she'll be drinking and then making out with guys left and right and before you know it you'll have a pregnant teen-ager and then her baby to take care of.”The name comes from the idea that one step down a slippery slope will inevitably lead you down to the bottom.
Fallacy supplementWishful ThinkingWishful thinking has the form:
I need it to be true, therefore it's true.
I want it to be true, therefore it's true.
This is distinct from certain self-fulling prophesies. For example, if you start by assuming that someone you've just met is nice (benefit of the doubt) and treat them accordingly, you may find that they are in fact nice (partly because you've treated them well).
Example:
I have to believe that anyone from my hometown must be innocent of murder.Example: (from
Fallacy Files)
"I was attending a spiritualist message reading service. The guest speaker had each of us write our name and a question on a piece of paper and then fold the paper. An usher collected the folded messages in a basket which she then placed beside the speaker's lectern. The speaker, who had been blindfolded, would reach into the basket, pull out a folded message, and hold it to his forehead. After a dramatic pause he would call out someone's name. The named person would then stand and the speaker would provide an answer to the question. Presumably this answer was supplied by the spirits. …
"… On this occasion, however, the speaker was having obvious difficulties. He was getting along in years and his eyesight was not very good. … So he pulled his blindfold away from his eyes with one hand while he blatantly opened the message with the other. After he read its contents, he refolded it, pulled his blindfold back in place, and continued with his routine.
"I looked at the members of the audience to see how they would react to this obvious display of cheating. … To my surprise, not one of them was looking at the speaker. Some were gazing at the ceiling, some were staring into their laps, and others had their eyes closed. The woman sitting next to me was one of those looking at the ceiling. I nudged her and pointed to the speaker at the moment he was opening a message. She looked at me instead. I whispered for her to look at the speaker. She turned and looked at the back of the room and then turned back to me. I kept urging her to look at the speaker. She leaned back and resumed staring at the ceiling.
"This bizarre behavior by the audience both puzzled and amazed me. … These people did not want to see the speaker cheating! They wanted to believe that he was providing them communications from their departed loved ones. … They dealt with this conspicuous example of cheating by simply not looking. …"
Source: Ray Hyman, "Foreword" to The Psychic Mafia, by M. Lamar Keene, Prometheus, 1997, pp. xiii-xv.
Appeal to IgnoranceAppeal to ignorance has the form:
There is no evidence against A, therefore A must be true.
We don't know A, therefore B is possible.
Where B is a claim that is unsupported by factual evidence.
Example:
Science doesn't know everything, so it could be that we are descended from space aliens.In terms of the 10/10 scale, one type of appeal to ignorance equates unequal values by slippery language; you aren't definitely certain that it's false (-10) therefore it is probably true (+5), or you aren't completely certain it's true (+10) so therefore it probably isn't true (-5).
Example:
You aren't 100% sure? You don't have any doubts? Well, if you aren't 100% sure then it's possible you don't know anything, so exactly why are you waisting out time with these flights of fancy?Example: (from
Fallacy Files)
"[Joe McCarthy] announced that he had penetrated 'Truman's iron curtain of secrecy' and that he proposed forthwith to present 81 cases… Cases of exactly what? 'I am only giving the Senate,' he said, 'cases in which it is clear there is a definite Communist connection…persons whom I consider to be Communists in the State Department.' … Of Case 40, he said, 'I do not have much information on this except the general statement of the agency…that there is nothing in the files to disprove his Communist connections.'"