Send the link below via email or IMCopy
Present to your audienceStart 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
Transcript of Logical Fallacies
Definition: is the informal fallacy of thinking a conclusion is correct because the speaker is poor, or it is incorrect because the speaker is rich.
Stacking the Deck
A.k.a. Data Beautification
Definition- a fallacy in which evidence that supports an opposing argument is simply rejected, omitted or ignored.
No True Scotsman
aka: no true Christian
when faced with a counterexample to a universal claim, rather than deny the counterexample, it modifies the subject to exclude the specific case
A: "All the marbles in this bag are blue."
B: "But this marble is red, and it's in the bag!"
A: "No. I just told you that all the marbles in this bag are blue. Since it's red, it can't actually be in the bag."
Stacking the Deck Video Commercial
Aka Monte Carlo Fallacy
Appeal to Poverty
Other names: argumentum ad lazarum, argumentum ad crumenam.
4-6 texual examples of the fallacy: - The working classes respect family and community ties.
Therefore: respect for family and community ties is virtuous
- X is rich or expensive, therefore x is correct or better.
- X is poor or cheap, therefore x is correct or better.
- Priests and nuns are more likely to possess insight into the meaning of life because they have given up the distractions of wealth.
-It cost more, must be better
the mistaken belief that if something happens more frequently than normal during some period, then it will happen less frequently in the future, or that if something happens less frequently than normal during some period, then it will happen more frequently in the future
Bill is playing against Doug in a WWII tank battle game. Doug has had a great "streak of luck" and has been killing Bill's tanks left and right with good die rolls. Bill, who has a few tanks left, decides to risk all in a desperate attack on Doug. He is a bit worried that Doug might wipe him out, but he thinks that since Doug's luck at rolling has been great Doug must be due for some bad dice rolls. Bill launches his attack and Doug butchers his forces.
Jane: "I'll be able to buy that car I always wanted soon."
Bill: "Why, did you get a raise?"
Jane: "No. But you know how I've been playing the lottery all these years?"
Bill: "Yes, you buy a ticket for every drawing, without fail."
Jane: "And I've lost every time."
Bill: "So why do you think you will win this time?"
Jane: "Well, after all those losses I'm due for a win."
Joe: "You see that horse over there? He lost his last four races. I'm going to bet on him."
Sam: "Why? I think he will probably lose."
Joe: "No way, Sam. I looked up the horse's stats and he has won half his races in the past two years.
Since he has lost three of his last four races, he'll have to win this race. So I'm betting the farm on him."
Sam: "Are you sure?"
Joe: "Of course I'm sure. That pony is due, man...he's due!"
McDonald: “No Scotsman would murder someone.”
Antony: “But wait, we know a Scotsman who just murdered someone yesterday!”
McDonald: “Well no true Scotsman would murder someone.”
If one did not support the war in Iraq, then he is not a true American or patriot.
If one does not accept evolutionary theory, then he is not a true atheist.
""The deck is stacked like a monte game. The advocates of some form of legalization include a judge, police chiefs, a mayor. But nothing is said about the great majority of judges, police officers and mayors who are opposed to legalization by any alias. "
"Biased talk-show hosts often stack the deck in their discussions of controversial issues by choosing more qualified and dynamic guests to represent the viewpoints they favor. If, by chance, the other guests seem to be overcoming the disadvantage, the host will interrupt and make it a 'two-on-one' debate. An even more outrageous form of stacking the deck is for talk-show hosts and program directors to ignore entirely the side of the issue they disagree with."
"The man trying to sell me the car talked only about how wonderful the car was. After I bought the car, another man tried to sell me an extended warranty by pointing out all the things that could break down."
"People sometimes make decisions by folding a piece of paper in half, and listing reasons in favor on one side, and reasons against on the other; then they decide intuitively which side has stronger (not necessarily more) reasons. This method forces us to look at both sides of an issue before we decide. In the incorrect form, we just look at half the picture." (Observation)
I have flipped tails 4 times, the next time I flip I should get heads.
The Super Epic Commercial
Appeal to Poverty video