Loading presentation...

Present Remotely

Send the link below via email or IM


Present to your audience

Start remote presentation

  • Invited audience members will follow you as you navigate and present
  • People invited to a presentation do not need a Prezi account
  • This link expires 10 minutes after you close the presentation
  • A maximum of 30 users can follow your presentation
  • Learn more about this feature in our knowledge base article

Do you really want to delete this prezi?

Neither you, nor the coeditors you shared it with will be able to recover it again.


Chapter 19 Prezi

Heather Trautmann's prezi about chapter 19 of everything's an argument.

Heather Trautmann

on 21 September 2012

Comments (0)

Please log in to add your comment.

Report abuse

Transcript of Chapter 19 Prezi

(cc) photo by theaucitron on Flickr Chapter 19
Fallacies of Argument
by Heather Trautmann Summary "Fallacies of Argument" is about how not to make an argument. It informs you of what you should not do when writing and what to look for in others' writing. Fallacies are weak arguments, whether the evidence is lacking, unrelated, or not strong enough. The fallacies are sorted into three categories of arguments: emotional, ethical, and logical. Emotional Logical Ethical APPEALS TO FALSE AUTHORITY: Chiefly occurs when writers use themselves or other authorities that they cite, as sufficient reason for believing a claim.
Ex: Many American politicians cite the U.S Constitution often, but the constitutional rights claimed are only sometimes in the text. DOGMATISM: When a writer tries to persuade by asserting that a certain position is the only one conceivably acceptable within a community.
Ex: Attacks on the historical reality of the Holocaust MORAL EQUIVALENCE: Suggests that serious wrongdoings are no different in kind from more minor offenses, blurring the subtle distinctions people need to make in laying claims.
Ex: If smoking is almost criminal, should one not be equally concerned with those who eat too much chocolate? AD HOMINEM ARGUMENTS: ("to the man") Attacks directed at the character of a person rather than at the claims he/she makes.
My Ex: I did not kill him, because I am not a murderer. HASTY GENERALIZATION: An inference drawn from insufficient evidence. It forms the basis of stereotypes.
My Ex: Because my dog likes popcorn, all dogs must like popcorn. FAULTY CAUSALTY: In Latin, it means "after this, therefore because of this. Because one event or action follows another, the first necessarily causes the second.
My Ex: Since my paper fell, my pencil also fell two minutes later. BEGGING THE QUESTION: A claim is made on grounds that cannot be accepted as true, because those grounds are in doubt.
My Ex:I did not kill him, because I am not a murderer. EQUIVOCATION: An argument that gives a lie a nice appearance; it is a half-truth.
Ex: Saying "I don't even have a nickel," knowing that you have dimes. NON SEQUITUR: An argument in which reasons fail to connect logically; one point does not follow from another. It is often used by children.
Ex: You don't love me or you'd buy me that bicycle. FAULTY ANALOGY: Comparisons that either prove to be false on their own or when taken too far or too seriously.
Ex: Comparing a brain to a garden. SCARE TACTICS: Often work to persuade people, they make humans fear something.Although, if the warning is too shrill, it will misfire.
Ex: When AIDS did not occur in the heterosexual population at the rate experts estimated, people downplayed the issue and were not careful. EITHER-OR CHOICES: Arguments become fallacious when they reduce a complex issue to excessively simple terms or when other alternatives are obscured.
Ex: Either you eat your broccoli or you do not get dessert. SLIPPERY SLOPE: When a writer exaggerates the future consequences of an action, usually intending to frighten readers.
My Ex: Warmer temperatures will melt the icecaps, flooding the Earth and ending all of humanity. BANDWAGON APPEALS: When people join a group that believes in something, because everybody else does.
Ex: Many Americans of the 1950s joined the bandwagon of being against Communism, causing the Red Scare. SENTIMENTAL APPEALS: Arguments that use emotions excessively to distract others from the facts. They are often highly personal and individual and are usually heart-warming or heart-wrenching.
My Ex: Commercials for the ASPCA use very sad commercials to get people to donate.
Full transcript