Rhetorical+Fallacies

= Fallacies in Rhetoric: =

From **//Everything's an Argument//**: === Certain types of argument moves are so controversial they have been traditionally classified as fallacies... But you might find it more interesting to think of them as flashpoints or hotspots because they instantly raise questions about the ethics of argument—that is, whether a particular strategy of argument is fair, accurate, or principled. === === Fallacies are arguments supposedly flawed by their very nature or structure; as such, you should avoid them in your own writing and challenge them in arguments you hear or read. That said, it’s important to appreciate that one person’s fallacy may well be another person’s stroke of genius. === === Think of fallacies not in terms of errors you can detect and expose in someone else’s work, but as strategies that hurt everyone (including the person using them) because they make productive argument more difficult. Fallacies muck up the frank but civil conversations people should be able to have– regardless of their differences. ===



media type="youtube" key="yp_l5ntikaU" width="420" height="315"

= ** The first five: ** =


 * 1. Ad Hominem **

Ad Hominem occurs when someone attacks another person’s point of view by criticizing that person, notthe issue.Often called “mudslinging”, ad hominem arguments try to invalidate a person’s ideas by revealing unrelated, past or present, personal or ethical flaws.

While this technique can appear obvious, be careful.The speaker can align the subject to a negative group or refer to a negative aspect of this person’s past. Either way, the speaker is trying to cast doubt or dislike on a person's reputation.


 * 2a. Begging the Question **

When the writer assumes the truth of something that is yet to be proven.

Hint: What is your support for that premise or what does that have to do with anything?



A) American education is failing so corporations should take over the administration of education. (The claim that American education is failing is quite a controversial topic with arguments on both sides. [|Over 50 Articles Defending American Education] Unless the author has effectively proven a claim, the audience should not move into the action part of this statement. Instead, the audience should question the statement and demand support.)

B)Mr. Jones is a good communicator because he speaks effectively. (Restates the conclusion)
 * 2b. Circular Reasoning **

media type="custom" key="26473572"

[]

3. Either /Or

This fallacy occurs when the author tries to insist that the situation can only be resolved in one oftwo possible ways.Here, the writer tends to bully the audience into a corner when really, there are manyother options available.




 * 4. Hasty Generalization **

Unsound conclusions based on too few instances of behavioror example. In order to create a true cause and effect reasoning statement, one would certainly need a much larger numberof examples and each example would need to be thoroughly tested.Look for keyword giveaways such as ‘all’, ‘none’, and ‘never.’ In general, no generalizations prove true.

Example: Deaths from overdoses in the city have doubled in the past three years. Therefore, more Americans than ever are dying from drug abuse.

Concluding that all fraternities are party houses because you have seen three parties at one fraternity is hasty generalization. The evidence is too limited to draw an adequate conclusion.

= 5. Appeal to Tradition / Antiquity =

Appeal to Tradition is a fallacy that occurs when it is assumed that something is better or correct simply because it is older, traditional, or "always has been done."
==== This sort of "reasoning" is fallacious because the age of something does not automatically make it correct or better than something newer. This is made quite obvious by the following example: The theory that witches and demons cause disease is far older than the theory that microrganisms cause diseases. Therefore, the theory about witches and demons must be true. ====

==== This sort of "reasoning" is appealing for a variety of reasons. First, people often prefer to stick with what is older or traditional. This is a fairly common psychological characteristic of people which may stem from the fact that people feel more comfortable about what has been around longer. Second, sticking with things that are older or traditional is often easier than testing new things. Hence, people often prefer older and traditional things out of laziness. Hence, Appeal to Tradition is a somewhat common fallacy. ====

http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/appeal-to-tradition.html

= The Next Five = **6. Red Herring** arguments are deliberate attempts redirect the audience’s attention to something entirely unrelated to the core issue. Rather than examine the merits of the issue, the author tries to draw attention to a peripheral and often unrelated topic. You could call this fallacy the classic ‘change the topic’ technique. The interesting part of recognizing this logical fallacy is not whether the speaker has changed the topic, but rather, you should be asking why the speaker is avoiding the subject.

Example: If someone tells you that Burger King has failed a number of health codes, a red herring response from the manager would be, “This wouldn’t have happened if the state didn’t arrest all of our employees the day before.” The manager’s response tries to distract the audience from his responsibility in the situation by discussing the arrest of his employees which might have inconvenienced him, but is not the reason for the health code violation.

Example: Notice that the question that the woman asks is how the administration is going to keep guns off the streets and away from kids. It is very likely that this woman was expecting a response that would be related to tougher gun laws or tougher penalties or maybe a specific action plan. Listen to where both of the candidates take the conversation. *Both candidates use the question to lead to something they would 'rather' talk about. media type="youtube" key="D6VmYOFGpbM" width="560" height="315"

**7. Post Hoc** thinking results when it’s presumed that one event caused another just because it occurred first. This illogical reasoning uses what could be considered a coincidence to explain a cause an effect relationship resulting in false generalizations and superstitions. There are far too many variable to consider and just because the two events may have happened at similar times, doesn’t mean that they are consequential. Example: If your car broke down the day after you lent it to your brother, you would be committing post hoc fallacy if you blamed your brother. Unless you know he did something directly to cause the engine problem, the fact is that the two events are inconsequential. Otherwise, there are many other reasons why the car broke down when it did.

**8. False Analogy** fallacies will try to suggest that because two things are alike in some ways, they are alike in all ways. The author will hope that the very significant differences between the two will be overlooked. Example: The universe is like an intricate watch. A watch must have been designed by a watchmaker. Therefore, the universe must have been designed by some kind of creator. While the universe may be like a watch in that it is intricate, this does not in itself justify the assumption that watches and the universe have similar origins nor does it prove the existence of a creator.

**9. Questionable Authority** fallacies are very popularly abused in advertising. These fallacies are revealed by such phrases as “studies show”, “experts claim”, and “surveys prove”. Readers have the right to be suspicious of the writer’s credibility when the authority behind the statements is never fully developed. Example: The students surveyed all agree that the school day should begin later in the morning. Critical readers should question which students were surveyed, what questions were involved in the survey, where and when the survey took place, and most importantly, whether students who may have bias towards the school starting time really are credible sources for this statement.

**10. Slippery Slope** fallacies are illogical jumps to conclusions based on one event. There may be many steps between one event to the next but the writer is leaping over the steps and hoping that the audience will join him. Slippery slope fallacies are largely based on fear or shock effect. Beneath the umbrella of slippery slope, you will often find appeals to fear. Example: If we don’t stop the tuition increase now, nobody will be able to afford college in the future. Assuming that ‘nobody’ will afford college is not logical and there are many stages before someone could draw such a drastic conclusion.

__Appeals and Fallacies In Advertising - Linoit Assignment __

**Part One**: Inform yourself on the directions. For this assignment, you and a partner will need to analyze a television commercial for its use of the rhetorical appeals and rhetorical fallacies. As reviewed in class, persuasion is an art that is best applied with the following:

1. A mindful awareness of the audience (needs, background, knowledge, FEARS). 2. A well considered plan that uses all three rhetorical strategies. 3. A specific goal in mind.

Smart advertisers rely on Aristotle's three major rhetorical devices: Logos, Ethos and Pathos. Some use fallacies to manipulate the audience into action without any credible or specific evidence.

Now that we have reviewed the concepts, it is your turn to demonstrate your ability to spot these devices at work in today's media.

You will use **__linoit.com__** for this assignment. Think about how you want your information organized on your board to be clear to the class. Here are some suggestions: <span style="background-color: #ffffff; font-family: Tahoma,Geneva,sans-serif; font-size: 23px;">- To earn credit, your sticky must be tagged with your last name(s), a title for the <span style="font-family: Tahoma,Geneva,sans-serif; font-size: 23px;">sticky which can simply be the category of post (such as 'appeal') or something more specific ('ethos'). <span style="background-color: #ffffff; font-family: Tahoma,Geneva,sans-serif; font-size: 23px;">- Keep your sticky notes organized on your board. You are sharing this one with the <span style="font-family: Tahoma,Geneva,sans-serif; font-size: 23px;">rest of the class. Therefore, it should be simple to follow and simple for you to <span style="background-color: #ffffff; font-family: Tahoma,Geneva,sans-serif; font-size: 23px;">stand up and present if asked.

<span style="background-color: #ffffff; font-family: Tahoma,Geneva,sans-serif; font-size: 23px;">Find Your Linoit Board <span style="background-color: #ffffff; font-family: Tahoma,Geneva,sans-serif; font-size: 23px;">Review the commercial and take notes on which fallacies you see at work in this commercial. <span style="background-color: #ffffff; font-family: Tahoma,Geneva,sans-serif; font-size: 23px;">Use the following colors for your stickies: <span style="background-color: #ffffff; font-family: Tahoma,Geneva,sans-serif; font-size: 23px;">Basic Subject, Occasion, Audience, Purpose <span style="background-color: #ffffff; font-family: Tahoma,Geneva,sans-serif; font-size: 23px;">Describe the product and provide a brief review of the commercial. <span style="font-family: Tahoma,Geneva,sans-serif; font-size: 23.2000007629395px;">Do the designers of this commercial know their target audience? If so, explain your evidence.
 * <span style="background-color: #ffffff; font-family: Tahoma,Geneva,sans-serif; font-size: 23px;">Part Two: Do **
 * <span style="background-color: #ffffff; font-family: Tahoma,Geneva,sans-serif; font-size: 23px;">Yellow: **

<span style="font-family: Tahoma,Geneva,sans-serif;"> Discuss Ethos, Pathos, Logos and how you see them applied in commercial. <span style="font-family: Tahoma,Geneva,sans-serif;"> <span style="font-family: Tahoma,Geneva,sans-serif;"> Identify any logical fallacies and discuss why this is not true, exaggerated, or used in the first place.
 * <span style="background-color: #ffffff; font-family: Tahoma,Geneva,sans-serif; font-size: 23px;">Green: **
 * <span style="font-family: Tahoma,Geneva,sans-serif;"> Pink: **

<span style="background-color: #ffffff; font-family: Tahoma,Geneva,sans-serif; font-size: 23px;">Use complete sentences, but be prepared to share with us without reading your sticky word for word.

<span style="background-color: #ffffff; font-family: Tahoma,Geneva,sans-serif; font-size: 23px;">What is the 'truth' about this product? Are audiences members misled, and if so, what is the potential harm of this deception? <span style="font-family: Tahoma,Geneva,sans-serif; font-size: 23px;">How might the advertisers manipulate an unknowing audience into purchasing the product?

<span style="background-color: #ffffff; font-family: Tahoma,Geneva,sans-serif; font-size: 23px;">When you are complete, you will need to explore three other boards <span style="font-family: Tahoma,Geneva,sans-serif; font-size: 23px;">and give each group feedback on their commerical. Perhaps you disagree about which device is most at work, or maybe you believe the author forgot to mention an important point. Maybe, you just think the piece is an excellent, hilarious, or scary example of how most people would nod right through this act of persuasion. Use complete sentences.
 * <span style="background-color: #ffffff; font-family: Tahoma,Geneva,sans-serif; font-size: 23px;">Part Two **

Worth: 20 points


 * calvin_and_hobbes.jpg ||