Fallacies: Are There Any Problems with the Reasoning?
Some kinds of appeals use faulty reasoning, or reasoning that some may consider
unfair, unsound, or demonstrating lazy or simpleminded thinking. Such appeals are
called fallacies, and because they can often be very powerful and persuasive, it’s
important to be alert for them in arguments you encounter—and in your own writing.
Here are some of the most common fallacies.
Either-or arguments, also called false dilemmas, argue that only two alternatives are
possible in a situation that actually is more complex. A candidate who declares, “I will
not allow the United States to become a defenseless, bankrupt nation—it must remain
the military and economic superpower of the world,” ignores the many possibilities in
between.
Ad hominem (Latin for “to the man”) arguments make personal attacks on those who
support an opposing position rather than address the position itself: “Of course
council member Acevedo doesn’t want to build a new high school; she doesn’t have
Faulty causality, the mistaken assumption that because one event followed another,
the first event caused the second, is also called post hoc, ergo propter hoc (Latin for
“after this, therefore because of this”). For example, a mayor running for reelection
may boast that a year after she began having the police patrol neighborhoods more
Bandwagon appeals simply urge the audience to go along with the crowd: “Join the
millions who’ve found relief from agonizing pain through Weleda Migraine Remedy.”
“Everybody knows you shouldn’t major in a subject that doesn’t lead to a job.” “Don’t
you agree that we all need to support our troops?” Such appeals often flatter the
eventually lead to an increase in the suicide rate, as people who would not otherwise
kill themselves find it easier to do so, and even to an increase in murders disguised as
suicide. Slippery slope arguments are not always wrong—an increasingly catastrophic
chain reaction does sometimes grow out of a seemingly small beginning. But the
run system.” In fact, although the legislation increased the federal government’s role
in the U.S. health-care system in some ways, it still relied primarily on private systems
of insurance and health-care providers.
Hasty generalizations draw sweeping conclusions on the basis of too little evidence:
“Both of the political science classes I took were deadly dull, so it must be a completely
boring subject.” “You shouldn’t drink so much coffee—that study that NPR reported on
today said it causes cancer.” Many hasty generalizations take the form of stereotypes
Faulty analogies are comparisons that do not hold up in some way crucial to the
argument they are used to support. Accusing parents who homeschool their children
of “educational malpractice” by saying that parents who aren’t doctors wouldn’t be
allowed to perform surgery on their children on the kitchen table, so parents who