35. Fallacious Arguments, Not as Dirty as They Sound.

Then again, maybe they're dirtier. It depends on your definition.

Seriously, though, it's starting to look like High School Debate and First-Year Logic courses aren't holding up their end of the deal when it comes to separating our young-uns from their logical fallacies. (See "Dude, Where's My Edukashun?" for more ranting on our educational failures.) They crop up a little too frequently where ideologies of any sort are concerned.

A few of the less-than-proud, but often used... (For a full list, click here.)

Argument From Adverse Consequences, Scare Tactics: X has to be wrong, because if it isn't, bad and terrible things will happen. And that's scary. So we're assuming the correctness of Y, which has more rainbows and fewer sharp edges.

Burden Of Proof: Demanding that a statement must be perceived as true if it cannot be proven false is fallacious. Likewise, demanding that something is unquestionably false if it cannot be proven true is also insufficient, depending on the position of the positive claim. The burden of proof lies with whomever is making the positive assertion.

Appeal To Force: Agree with me, or else.

Tautology, Circular Logic: A is true because B. B is true because C. And C is true because A. 'Round and 'round the mulberry bush. Monkey or weasel, you're still on unstable ground.

Appeal To Widespread Belief: Everyone else believes it. Join the bandwagon! Consensus gentium, and all that.

Slippery Slope: Let the camel's nose into the tent, and pretty soon you'll have the whole creature in your bed. A is wrong because it's way too close to B, which is so close to C that D will be on you before you know it, and by god, E is right around the corner! Ahhhh!

Argument By Pigheadedness: The absolute refusal to accept a proven statement, regardless of evidence or reason. This often leads to emotional adamancy. A principle taught to aspiring lawyers: If you have the facts, pound on the facts. If you have the evidence, pound on the evidence. If you have neither, pound on the table.

Argument By Selective Observation: Cherry picking isn't just for fruit. This is touting only that evidence which supports your argument, while ignoring the facts that do not. Francis Bacon referred to it as "counting the hits and forgetting the misses."

Statement Of Conversion: I once believed X, I now believe Y. Therefore, Y is a superior belief. Adamancy is often a factor in this one as well.

Non Sequitur: When "ergo" goes awry. An umbrella term for any assumption that does not logically follow from the base assertion.

Argument By Slogan: Politicians LOVE this one. Putting beliefs in advertising form and pointing to them as evidence.

Error Of Fact: Bogus statements, usually made as a result of ignorance. "No one knows how we came to be here." Biologists do. "No one knows how the pyramids were constructed." Historians do. "No one will ever know how long this tree has been here." I'm pretty sure an arborist could figure that one out.

Argument From Personal Astonishment: A form of Fact-Error, this is stating opinion in place of fact. (The speaker's thought process being "I don't see how this is possible, so it isn't.")

Outdated Information: Fairly self-explanatory, this is quoting information that is no longer viewed as viable, or even accurate. A subset of Cherry Picking.

Least-Plausible Hypothesis: The foe of Occam's Razor, where the most outrageous explanation is regarded as the right one. Hearing hoof-beats and pointing to unicorns as the culprit.

Appeal To Complexity: "I don't understand it. So, no one else does either. My opinions are tantamount to those given by any expert."

Argument By Uninformed Opinion: "I don't know anything at all about the topic, and I don't want to. But I have an opinion, and my opinion matters."

False Compromise: Commonly, when arguers (or spectators to the argument) cannot come to a resolution, they assume that the truth must lie somewhere in between the two opinions. It is more than possible for one side, even for BOTH sides, to be quite simply wrong. In either case, no compromise need be granted.



Having the ability to recognize these failures of logic, in yourself as much as your debate opponent, is important. But please don't spend hours and days typing these basic terms into forums and comments as rebuttals in and of themselves. It just makes you look like an ass.