an argument that includes the claim that is impossible for the conclusion to be false given that the premises are true
Valid deductive argument is when it is
impossible for the conclusion to be false given that the premises are true
Invalid deductive argument is when it is
possible for the conclusion to be false given that the premises are true
is valid and has all true premises
is invalid, has one or more false premises or both. THe premises must be needed to support the conclusion
an argument includes the claim that it is not likely that the conclusion be false given that the premises are true
strong inductive argument
in which its improbable that the conclusion be false given that the premises are true
weak inductive argument
in which the conclusion does not follow probably form the premises even though its claimed to
maybe identified by examining the structure of an argument, only found in deductive arguments
maybe detected only by examining the content of the argument
Appeal to Force
occurs whenever an arguer poses a conclusion to another person and tells that person either completely or incompletely that some harm will come to him/her if s/he does not accept the conclusion (threat)
ex. Child to playmate: Sesame street is the best show on tv; and if you dont believe it i'm gonna call my big brother over here and he is going to beat you up
Appeal to Pitty
occurs when an arguer attempt to support a conclusion by merely arouse pity from the reader or listener. it may be directed in the third party.
ex. Mr G has argued against prayer in the public schools. obviously mr. g advocates atheism. but athism is what they used in russia. atheism leads to the suppression of all the religions and the replacement of god by omnipotent state. is that what we want for this country? i hardly think so. Clearly mr. g 's argument is nonsense.
Missing the Point
occurs when the premises support one particular conclusion but a different conclusion, often vaguely relates to the correct conclusion, is drawn
ex. crimes of theft and robbery have been increasing at an alarming rate lately. The conclusion is obvious: we must reinstate the death penalty immediately.
is committed when the arguer diverts the attention of the reader or listener by changing the subject to a different byt sometimes subtly related one w/o the reader noticing.
ex. tere is a good deal of talk these days about the need to eliminate pesicides from our fruits and vegetables. But many of these foods are essential to our health. carrots are an excellent source of Vitamin A, broccoli is rich in iron, and oranges and grapefruit have lots of Vitamin C.
Appeal to the unqualified authority
is a variety of the argument for authority and occurs hen the cited authority or witness lacks creditability. THe person could be bias, prejudiced, might have motive to lie or disseminate.
Appeal to ignorance
when the premises states that nothing has been proved one way or the other about something and the conclusion then makes a definite assertion about that thing
ex. ppl have been trying for centuries to provide conclusive evidence for claims of astrology, and no one has ever succeded. Therefore, we must conclude that astrology is a lot of nonsense.
that affects inductive generalizations, which draws a conclusion about all members of a group from evidence that pertains to a selected sample.
Appeal to the People
uses disires (to be loved, esteemed, admired valued, recognized, accepted) to get the reader or listener to accept the conclusion. Can be direct or indirect.
Appeal to vanity
often associates the product with someone who is admired; the idea being that you will be admired to if you use it
ex. The Few, the Proud, the Marines
Appeal to Snobbery
indirect version of the appeal to the people can overlap the false cause fallacy
ex. Mother to child: you wan to grow up and be just like wonder woman dont you? then eat your liver and carrots
Argument against the Person
involves two arguers. one of them advances a certain argument and the other then response by directing his/her attention not the the 1st person's argument but to the 1st person himself
is committed when a general rule is applied to a specific case it was not intended to cover. The general rule is cited in the promises and then wrongly applied to the specific case mentioned in the conclusion.
ex freedom od speech is constitutionally guaranteed right. Therefore, JJ should not be arrested for his speech that incited the rite last week.
is committed when an arguer distorts an opponent's argument for the purpose of more easily attacking it, demolishes the distorted argument, and the concludes that the opponent's real argument has been demolishes
occurs whenever the link between premises and conclusion depends on some imagined causal connection that probably doesn't exist. (X does not apply to all Y's)
is committed when the analogy is not strong enough to support the conclusion that is drawn
Car and color example
Begging the Question
is committed whenever the arguer creates the illusion that inadequate premises provide adequate support for the conclusion by leaving out a possible false key premise, by restating a possibly false premise as the conclusion or reasoning in a circle
is committed when 2 or more questions are asked in the guise of a singe question and a single answer is then given both of them.
ex. Have you stopped cheating on exams? Where did you hid he marijuana you were smoking.
is committed when a disjunctive premise presents 2 unlikely alternatives as if they were the only ones available, and the arguer then eliminated the undesirable alternative, leaving one as the conclusion.
ex. Either you let me go or else i will be miserable for the rest of my life. I know that you dont want me to be miserable for the rest of my life so you will let me go
is when the inductive argument ignores the important evidence and entails a very different conclusion.
occurs when the conclusion of an argument depends on the face that a word or phrase is used, either explicitly or implicitly, in 2 different sense in the argument.
ex. a mouse is an animal. therefore a large morse is a large animal.
occurs when an arguer misinterprets an ambiguous statement and then draws a conclusion based on the faulty interpertation
is committed when the conclusion depends on the error transference of an attribute from the parts of something onto the whole.