If you must argue, argue correctly.

A solid argument is based on three key appeals: Ethos (appeals to the sense of right and wrong)

Pathos (emotional appeals)

Logos (appeals based on logic)

Many arguments fail to persuade because they lack sound reasoning.

Rhetorical fallacies are to blame!

Definition:fal⋅la⋅cy [fal-uh-see]–noun 1. a deceptive, misleading, or false

notion, belief, etc.: EX. That the world is flat was at one time a popular fallacy.

2. a misleading or unsound argument. 3. deceptive, misleading, or false nature;

4. In logic, any of various types of erroneous reasoning that render arguments logically unsound.

…come in three flavors: Ethical Fallacies: unreasonably advance the

writer’s own authority or character

Emotional Fallacies: unfairly appeal to the audience’s emotions

Logical Fallacies: depend on faulty logic

One problem that many people have when they argue is that they slip fallacies into their arguments without knowing it.

Fallacies weaken arguments! They sound great, and may seem to

make sense on the surface, but do not serve to actually persuade the opposition.

Know them. Recognize them. Do not use them! The best part of all comes when one can

point out a fallacy during the course of argument to the speaker. The argument usually stops very quickly thereafter.

Ethical Fallacies

False authority: asks audiences to agree with the speaker’s assertion based on his/her character or the authority of another person or institution that isn’t qualified to offer that assertion. EX. My third grade teacher said so, so it must be

true.

Guilt by association: calls someone’s character into question by examining the character of that person’s associates. EX. Sara’s friend Amy robbed a bank; Sara is a

delinquent.

Dogmatisim: shuts down discussion by asserting that that the speaker’s beliefs are the only acceptable ones: EX. I’m sorry, but I think penguins are sea creatures and

that’s that.

Ad hominem (character attack)– arguments that attack a person’s character rather than their reasoning EX. Why should think a candidate who recently divorced will

keep his campaign promises? Ad Hominem Tu Quoque - Tu Quoque is a very common

fallacy in which one attempts to defend oneself or another from criticism by turning the critique back against the accuser. EX. Bill: "Smoking is very unhealthy and leads to all sorts of problems. So

take my advice and never start." Jill: “How can you even say that? You smoke 3 packs a day!"

Strawman – these arguments set up and dismantle easily refutable argument in order to misrepresent and opponents argument in order to defeat him or her Speaker A: We need to regulate access to handguns. Speaker B: My opponent believes that we should ignore the

rights guaranteed to us as citizens of the United States by the Constitution. Unlike my opponent, I am a firm believer in in the Constitution, and a proponent of freedom.

Emotional Fallacies

Sentimental appeals: use emotion to distract the audience from the facts. EX. The thousands of baby seals killed in the Exxon

Valdez oil spill have shown us that oil is not a reliable energy source.

Scare tactics: these try to frighten people into agreeing with the arguer by threatening them or predicting unrealistically dire consequences. EX. If you don’t support the party’s tax plan, you and

your family will be reduced to poverty.

Bandwagon appeals: encourage an audience to agree with the speaker because everyone else is doing it. EX. Paris Hilton carries a small dog in her purse, so you

should buy a hairless Chihuahua and put it in your Loius Vuitton.

Slippery Slope: these arguments suggest that one thing will lead to another, oftentimes with disastrous consequences. EX. If you get a B in high school, you’ll never get into

college, and therefore will never have a meaningful career.

Either/Or choices: reduces complicated issues to two possible courses of action EX. The patent office can either approve my new

engine design or say goodbye forever to a low emissions car.

False need: these arguments create false need EX. You need this expensive car or people won’t think

you’re cool.

Logical Fallacies

Hasty generalization: draws conclusions from minimal evidence EX. I wouldn’t eat at that restaurant – the only time I

ate there. My entrée was undercooked.

Post hoc (false causality): these arguments confuse chronology with causation, one event can occur without being caused by it. EX. A year after the release of the violent shoot-’em-up

game Annihilator, incidents of violence tripled – surely not a coincidence.

Non sequitur (Latin for “it does not follow): is a statement that does not logically relate to what comes before it. An important logical step is missing! EX. Johnson has missed his last five free throws.  He’s

normally an 80% shooter, so he’s got to make this one!

Begging the question: occurs when the speaker simply restates the claim in a different way; such an argument is circular. EX. His lies are evident from the untruthful

nature of his statements.

Faulty analogy: is an inaccurate, inappropriate, or misleading comparison between two things. EX. Letting prisoners out on early release is

like absolving them of their crimes.