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
Do you really want to delete this prezi?
Neither you, nor the coeditors you shared it with will be able to recover it again.
Make your likes visible on Facebook?
You can change this under Settings & Account at any time.
Transcript of RHETORICAL FALLACIES
An argument that is not sound (i.e. not valid, or based on solid facts), but may still be convincing.
An overstatement or stretching the truth (taking the truth and making it more than it seems)
Three types of Rhetorical Fallacy:
1. Emotional Fallacy
Appeals to the audience's emotions or feelings
2. Ethical Fallacy
Bases the argument on the creator's character and authority
3. Logical Fallacy
Depends upon faulty logic or evidence
In rhetoric, the means of persuasion in an argument. How you persuade your audience.
According to Aristotle, there are three
fundamental appeals to convince a person:
Latin for "to the man" or "to the person"
A rhetorical fallacy where one side attacks the character or circumstance of the proponent (opposite side) of the position in order to distract from the argument.
This personal attack is intended to devalue the claim without regard for the evidence provided.
For example, consider
the following interchange:
Person A: It is important to give vaccines to children.
Person B: Of course you would say that. You are a nurse.
Person A: I provided research and evidence to support my opinion. Did you read that?
Person B: That doesn't matter. You are a nurse, and just like everyone else in the medical world, you are trying to make a buck.
A rhetorical fallacy in which one classifies a person or group according to a common aspect that is oversimplified, rigidly applied, and often uncomplimentary.
A rhetorical fallacy in which a claim is based often incorrectly on relating two things because they are in the same category.