Top Banner
Chapter 17: Fallacies of Argument Mark Ruiz Sam Clark Dora Rodriguez Clay
8

Chapter 17: Fallacies of Argument Mark Ruiz Sam Clark Dora Rodriguez Clay.

Dec 18, 2015

Download

Documents

Barnard Cox
Welcome message from author
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
Page 1: Chapter 17: Fallacies of Argument Mark Ruiz Sam Clark Dora Rodriguez Clay.

Chapter 17: Fallacies of Argument

Mark RuizSam Clark

Dora RodriguezClay

Page 2: Chapter 17: Fallacies of Argument Mark Ruiz Sam Clark Dora Rodriguez Clay.

Fallacies of Emotional Argument (Pathos)

• Scare Tactics- Reducing complicated situations into simple threats or the exaggeration of a possible danger to get a desired outcome

• Slippery slope- Exaggeration of future consequence by suggesting that a small misstep will initiate a series of reactions, ending a bigger result(“logical fallacies”)

Direct TV- Roadside Ditch

Allstate Mayhem

Page 3: Chapter 17: Fallacies of Argument Mark Ruiz Sam Clark Dora Rodriguez Clay.

Pathos continued

• Either or consequences-

Page 4: Chapter 17: Fallacies of Argument Mark Ruiz Sam Clark Dora Rodriguez Clay.

Pathos Continued

Sentimental Appeals- Relying entirely on manipulatively heart-warming or heart-wrenching appeals to emotionto win support for what has not been otherwise rationally justified

Bandwagon- Example:Tebowing. Suggesting that because others are doing it, you should as well.

Page 5: Chapter 17: Fallacies of Argument Mark Ruiz Sam Clark Dora Rodriguez Clay.

Fallacies of Authority (Ethos)• Dogmatism-

• There’s no way a man could ever love a man or a woman could ever love a woman as much as a man and a woman can love each other (“logical fallacies”).

• There’s no way that anyone can argue that abortion is anything other than murder (“logical Fallacies”).

• Ad Hominem– Theory: When you destroy the credibility of your opponents

you either destroy their ability to present reasonable appeals or distract from the successful arguments offered.

– Example:

Page 6: Chapter 17: Fallacies of Argument Mark Ruiz Sam Clark Dora Rodriguez Clay.

Fallacies of Logical Argument (Logos)

• Hasty Generalizations– Qualify our claims appropriately as

generalizations are necessary to understand a large population.

• Faulty Causality• Begging the Question

Everybody Hates Chris- Stereotype: All black people are good at basketball.

Page 7: Chapter 17: Fallacies of Argument Mark Ruiz Sam Clark Dora Rodriguez Clay.

Logos continued

• Equivocation- A half Truth• Non-sequitur-• The Straw Man- Becomes an argument

against a false opponent.• Faulty Analogy- An analogy is a

comparison of two circumstances to better grasp the obscurity of the subject. A faulty analogy is a failed attempt at this.

Page 8: Chapter 17: Fallacies of Argument Mark Ruiz Sam Clark Dora Rodriguez Clay.

Works Cited“Direct tv - roadside ditch.mp4 - YouTube ." YouTube - Broadcast Yourself. . N.p., n.d. Web. 30 Mar. 2012. <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hpwlh1yl054>.

" Allstate TV: Blind Spot Mayhem - YouTube ." YouTube - Broadcast Yourself. . N.p., n.d. Web. 30 Mar. 2012. <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ndHOmYCMaXQ>.

Jones, Lindsay. "The story behind the "Tebowing" craze | First-and-Orange — Denver Broncos news, stats, analysis — The Denver Post." Denver Post Blogs. N.p., n.d. Web. 30 Mar. 2012. <http://blogs.denverpost.com/broncos/2011/10/27/the-story-behind-the-tebowing-crazy/10368/>.

" Everybody Hates Chris - White Coach - YouTube ." YouTube - Broadcast Yourself. . N.p., n.d. Web. 30 Mar. 2012. <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EvO6FJoQPA4>.

“logical fallacies." University of Wisconsin-Eau Claire. N.p., n.d. Web. 30 Mar. 2012. <http://www.uwec.edu/ranowlan/logical%20fallacies.html>.