Types-of-fallaciesfinal of Philosophicaly

jjj

1. Logical Fallacies: Errors in Reasoning Logical fallacies are common errors in reasoning that can lead to invalid conclusions. Identifying these fallacies is crucial for developing strong critical thinking skills. By understanding the different types of fallacies, you can analyze arguments more effectively, avoid making these errors yourself, and become a more informed and discerning thinker.

2. Appeal to Pity (Argumentum ad Misericordiam ) The Appeal to Pity, or Argumentum ad Misericordiam, is a logical fallacy that attempts to sway an audience by exploiting their emotions of pity or guilt. Example:Someone in a job interview says, "The reason I am deserving of this job is because my mother is on her death bed and she really wants to see me have this job before she passes away."

3. Appeal to Ignorance Definition -Whatever has not been proven false must be true, and vice versa. Example Example 1:No one has ever proven that extraterrestrial life doesn’t exist, so aliens must be real." Another word of this Example 2:No one has proven that time travel is impossible, so it must be possible."

4. Equivocation Equivocation is a logical fallacy that occurs when a word or phrase with multiple meanings is used in an argument in a way that creates confusion or misdirection. Ex. "Eating animals is wrong because they have feelings too." Equivocation: A Misleading Use of Words Equivocation is a type of fallacy where a word or phrase is used with two or more different meanings within a single argument, leading to a misleading or illogical conclusion.

5. Composition and Division Composition Division 4.Composition - This infers that something is true of the whole from the fact that it is true of some part of the whole. The reverse of this fallacy is division Ex.1 This tire is made of rubber; therefore, the vehicle of which it is a part is also made of rubber. 2. if you stand up at a concert, you can usually see better Division fallacy-One reasons logically that something true of a thing must also be true of all or some of its parts. Ex. 1. "A cake is sweet, so every ingredient in the cake must be sweet too.“ 2. "A basketball team is the best in the league, so each player on the team must also be the best in the league."

6. Against the Person (Argumentum ad Hominem) Definition Against the Person (Argumentum ad hominem) - This fallacy attempts to link the validity of a premise to a characteristic or belief of the person advocating the premise. However, in some instances, questions of personal conduct, character, and motives, among others, are legitimate if relevant to the issue

7. Ad hominem: Latin for "to the person," indicating that the argument is directed at the person rather than the issue 1. Abusive Ad Hominem: This type directly attacks the character or personality of the opponent, attempting to undermine their credibility. 2. Circumstantial Ad Hominem: This type focuses on the opponent's circumstances or motives, suggesting that their argument is biased or influenced by personal interests.

8. Appeal to Force (Argumentum ad Baculum) 1 Definition An argument where force, coercion, or the threat of force is given as a justification for a conclusion. Is argumentation using force or the threat of force to convince others to accept an argument’s conclusion. Appealing to force is considered fallacious because it uses an irrelevant basis for making an argument, such as physical force, emotional manipulation, or scare tactics.

9. Example: “ Agree that I’m right or else I will beat you up”

10. Appeal to the People (Argumentum ad Populum) - An argument that appeals or exploits people's vanities, desire for esteem, and anchors on popularity. Example: 1. Everyone is using this new phone, so itmust be the best 2.Tide Ultra is better than Surf because many Filipinos used it

11. False Cause (Post Hoc) -This fallacy is also referred to as coincidental correlation or correlation not causation. - is an argument that draws the conclusion that one event is directly caused by another event without evidence to prove this. The conclusion suggests a cause and effect relationship between two events, or one event or thing causing a specific effect.

12. Ex. Event 1-I wish on a star Event 2-My wish comes true Post Hoc fallacy-My wish came true because I wished on a star Event 1-Rooster crows Event 2-Sun rises Post Hoc -The rooster's crowing causes the sun to rise.

13. Hasty Generalization One commits errors if one reaches an inductive generalization based on insufficient evidence. The fallacy is commonly based on a broad conclusion upon the statistics of a survey of a small group that fails to sufficiently represent the whole population. Ex 1: In PetsA person sees three dogs in their neighborhood, and all of them have long fur. They say, "All dogs have long fur!” Ex. 2: In StudentsA teacher sees five students in their class using cell phones while studying. They say, "All students today do not study well!"

14. Begging the question ( petitio principii ) - This is a type of fallacy in which the proposition to be proven is assumed implicitly or explicitlyin the premise. Example: 1. You should drive on the right side of the road because that is what the law says, and the law is the law 2. This new product is amazing because it's the most popular one on the market. We know it's the most popular because it's amazing