http:\/\/www.marileejones.com<\/span><\/a>) she is still promoting herself as \u201ca sought after speaker, consultant and author\u201d (para. 1) and \u201cone of the nation\u2019s most experienced College Admissions Deans\u201d (para. 2).<\/span><\/p>\r\nBeyond lying about their own credentials, authors may employ a number of tricks or fallacies to lure you to their point of view. Some of the more common techniques are described below.\u00a0When you recognize these fallacies being committed you should question the credibility of the speaker and the legitimacy of the argument. If you use these when making your own arguments, be aware that they may undermine or destroy your credibility.<\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n
Fallacies That Misuse Appeals to Ethos<\/h3>\r\nAd hominem<\/b>: attacking the person making an argument rather than the argument itself.<\/span>\r\nExample:\u00a0<\/span>\u201cOf course that doctor advocates vaccination\u2014he probably owns stock in a pharmaceutical company.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\r\n<\/b>False authority<\/b>: relying on claims of expertise when the claimed expert (a) lacks adequate background\/credentials in the relevant field, (b) departs in major ways from the consensus in the field, or (c) is biased, e.g., has a financial stake in the outcome.<\/span>\r\nExample:\u00a0<\/span>\u201cDr. X is an engineer, and\u00a0he<\/i><\/b>\u00a0doesn\u2019t believe in global warming.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\r\n<\/b>Guilt by association<\/b>: linking the person making an argument to an unpopular person or group.<\/span>\r\nExample:\u00a0<\/span>\u201cMy opponent is a card-carrying member of the ACLU.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\r\n<\/b>Poisoning the well: <\/b>undermining an opponent\u2019s credibility before he or she gets a chance to speak.<\/span>\r\nExample:\u00a0<\/span>\u201cThe prosecution is going to bring up a series or so-called experts who are getting a lot of money to testify here today.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\r\n<\/b>Transfer fallacy<\/b>: associating the argument with someone or something popular or respected; hoping that the positive associations will \u201crub off\u201d onto the argument.<\/span>\r\nExamples:\u00a0<\/span>In politics, decorating a stage with red, white, and blue flags and bunting; in advertising, using pleasant or wholesome settings as the backdrop for print or video ads.<\/span><\/p>\r\n<\/b>Name-calling<\/b>: labeling an opponent with words that have negative connotations in an effort to undermine the opponent\u2019s credibility.<\/span>\r\nExample:<\/span>\u00a0\u201cThese rabble-rousers are nothing but feminazis.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\r\n<\/b>Plain folk<\/b>: presenting yourself as (or associating your position with) ordinary people with whom you hope your audience will identify; arguers imply that they or their supporters are trustworthy because they are \u2018common people\u2019 rather than members of the elite.<\/span>\r\nExample:\u00a0<\/span>\u201cWho would you vote for\u2014someone raised in a working-class neighborhood who has the support of Joe the Plumber or some elitist whose daddy sent him to a fancy school?\u201d<\/span><\/p>\r\n<\/b>Testimonial fallacy<\/b>: inserting an endorsement of the argument by someone who is popular or respected but who lacks expertise or authority in the area under discussion.<\/span>\r\nExample:\u00a0<\/span>\u201cI\u2019m not a doctor, but I play one on TV\u201d\u2014a famous example of a celebrity endorsement for a cough syrup (Deis, 2011, n.p.).<\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n<\/div>\r\n \r\n\r\n[caption id=\"attachment_323\" align=\"aligncenter\" width=\"391\"]![\"Image](\"https:\/\/s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com\/courses-images\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/107\/2016\/06\/12202220\/4557131838_e482a77b84_z.jpg\")
The most general structure of this argument runs something like the following: Person A claims that Person A is a respected scientist or other authority; therefore, the claim they make is true.[\/caption]\r\nEvaluating an Appeal to\u00a0Logos<\/span><\/h3>\r\nWhen you evaluate an appeal to\u00a0logos, you consider how logical the argument is and how well-supported it is in terms of evidence. You are asking yourself what elements of the essay or speech would cause an audience to believe that the argument is (or is not) logical and supported by appropriate evidence.<\/span><\/p>\r\nTo evaluate whether the evidence is appropriate, apply the\u00a0STAR <\/b>criteria: how\u00a0S<\/b>ufficient,\u00a0T<\/b>ypical,\u00a0A<\/b>ccurate, and\u00a0R<\/b>elevant is the evidence?\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\nRecognizing a Manipulative Appeal to\u00a0Logos<\/h3>\r\n
Diagramming the argument - identifying the main claim and the main supporting points\u00a0or premises - can help you determine if an appeal to logos is manipulative. Write out the main, overall, claim or conclusion.\u00a0 Then identify the supporting claims or premises. Are the premises true? Does the conclusion follow logically from the premises? Is there sufficient, typical, accurate, and relevant evidence to support\u00a0the reasoning? Is the speaker or author attempting to divert your attention from the real issues? These are some of the elements you might consider while evaluating an argument for the use of logos.<\/span><\/p>\r\nPay particular attention to numbers, statistics, findings, and quotes used to support an argument. Be critical of the source and do your own investigation of the \u201cfacts.\u201d Maybe you\u2019ve heard or read that half of all marriages in America will end in divorce. It is so often discussed that we assume it must be true. Careful research will show that the original marriage study was flawed, and divorce rates in America have steadily declined since 1985 (Peck, 1993). If there is no scientific evidence, why do we continue to believe it? Part of the reason might be that it supports our idea of the dissolution of the American family.<\/span><\/p>\r\nFallacies that misuse appeals to logos or attempt to manipulate the logic of an argument are discussed below. <\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n
Fallacies That Misuse Appeals to\u00a0Logos<\/h3>\r\nHasty generalization:<\/b> jumping to conclusions based upon an unrepresentative sample or insufficient evidence.<\/span>\r\nExample: <\/span>\u201c10 of the last 14 National Spelling Bee Champions have been Indian American. Indian Americans must all be great spellers!\u201d<\/span><\/p>\r\n<\/b>Appeal to ignorance\u2014true believer\u2019s form: <\/b>arguing along the lines that if an opponent can\u2019t prove something\u00a0isn\u2019t<\/i><\/b>\u00a0the case, then it is reasonable to believe that it\u00a0is<\/i><\/b>\u00a0the case; transfers the burden of proof away from the person making the claim (the proponent).<\/span>\r\nExample:\u00a0<\/span>\u201cYou can\u2019t prove that extraterrestrials\u00a0haven\u2019t<\/i><\/b>\u00a0visited earth, so it is reasonable to believe that they\u00a0have<\/i><\/b>\u00a0visited earth.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\r\n<\/b>Appeal to ignorance\u2014skeptic\u2019s form: <\/b>confusing absence of evidence with evidence of absence; assumes that if you cannot now<\/i><\/b>\u00a0prove something exists, then it is shown that it doesn\u2019t exist.<\/span>\r\nExample:\u00a0<\/span>\u201cThere\u2019s no proof that starting classes later in the day will improve the performance of our high school students; therefore, this change in schedule will not work.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\r\n<\/b>Begging the question: <\/b>circular argument because the premise is the same as the claim that you are trying to prove.<\/span>\r\nExample:\u00a0<\/span>\u201cThis legislation is sinful because it is the wrong thing to do.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\r\n<\/b>False dilemma: <\/b>misuse of the either\/or argument; presenting only two options when other choices exist<\/span>\r\nExample:\u00a0<\/span>\u201cEither we pass this ordinance or there will be rioting in the streets.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\r\n<\/b>Post hoc ergo propter hoc: <\/b>Latin phrase meaning \u201cafter this, therefore because of this\u201d; confuses correlation with causation by concluding that an event preceding a second event must be the cause of that second event.<\/span>\r\nExample:\u00a0<\/span>\u201cMy child was diagnosed with autism after receiving vaccinations. That is proof that vaccines are to blame.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\r\n<\/b>Non-sequitur: <\/b>Latin for \u201cdoes not follow\u201d; the conclusion cannot be inferred from the premises because there is a break in the logical connection between a claim and the premises that are meant to support it, either because a premise is untrue (or missing) or because the relationship between premises does not support the deduction stated in the claim.<\/span>\r\nExample (untrue premise):<\/span>\u201cIf she is a Radford student, she is a member of a sorority. She is a Radford student. Therefore she is a member of a sorority.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\r\n<\/b>Smoke screen<\/b>: avoiding the real issue or a tough question by introducing an unrelated topic as a distraction; sometimes called a red herring<\/b>.<\/span>\r\nExample:\u00a0<\/span>\u201cMy opponent says I am weak on crime, but I have been one of the most reliable participants in city council meetings.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\r\n<\/b>Straw man: <\/b>pretending to criticize an opponent\u2019s position but actually misrepresenting his or her view as simpler and\/or more extreme than it is and therefore easier to refute than the original or actual position; unfairly undermines credibility of\u00a0claim<\/i><\/b>\u00a0if not source<\/i><\/b>\u00a0of claim.<\/span>\r\nExample:<\/span>\u00a0\u201cSenator Smith says we should cut back the Defense budget. His position is that we should let down our defenses and just trust our enemies not to attack us!\u201d<\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n[caption id=\"attachment_322\" align=\"aligncenter\" width=\"500\"]![\"Picture](\"https:\/\/s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com\/courses-images\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/107\/2016\/06\/12201243\/4603295958_500d6510d4_z.jpg\")
The red herring is as much a debate tactic as it is a logical fallacy. It is a fallacy of distraction, and is committed when a listener attempts to divert an arguer from his argument by introducing another topic. This can be one of the most frustrating, and effective, fallacies to observe.The fallacy gets its name from fox hunting, specifically from the practice of using smoked herrings, which are red, to distract hounds from the scent of their quarry. Just as a hound may be prevented from catching a fox by distracting it with a red herring, so an arguer may be prevented from proving his point by distracting him with a tangential issue.[\/caption]\r\nEvaluating an Appeal to\u00a0Pathos<\/span><\/h3>\r\nPeople may be uninterested in an issue unless they can find a personal connection to it, so a communicator may try to connect to her audience by evoking emotions or by suggesting that author and audience share attitudes, beliefs, and values\u2014in other words, by making an appeal to pathos. Even in formal writing, such as academic books or journals, an author often will try to present an issue in such a way as to connect to the feelings or attitudes of his audience.<\/span><\/p>\r\nWhen you evaluate pathos, you are asking whether a speech or essay arouses the audience\u2019s interest and sympathy. You are looking for the elements of the essay or speech that might cause the audience to feel (or not feel) an emotional connection to the content.<\/span><\/p>\r\nAn author may use an audience\u2019s attitudes, beliefs, or values as a kind of foundation for his argument\u2014a layer that the writer knows is already in place at the outset of the argument. So one of the questions you can ask yourself as you evaluate an author\u2019s use of pathos is whether there are points at which the writer or speaker makes statements assuming that the audience shares his feelings or attitudes. For example, in an argument about the First Amendment, does the author write as if he takes it for granted that his audience is religious?<\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\nRecognizing a Manipulative Appeal to\u00a0Pathos<\/h3>\r\n
Up to a certain point, an\u00a0<\/span>appeal to pathos\u00a0can be a legitimate part of an argument. For example, a writer or speaker may begin with an anecdote showing the effect of a law on an individual. This anecdote will be a means of gaining an audience\u2019s attention for an argument in which she uses evidence and reason to present her full case as to why the law should\/should not be repealed or amended. In such a context, engaging the emotions, values, or beliefs of the audience is a legitimate tool whose effective use should lead you to give the author high marks.<\/span><\/p>\r\nAn appropriate appeal to\u00a0pathos\u00a0is different than trying to unfairly play upon the audience\u2019s feelings and emotions through fallacious, misleading, or excessively emotional appeals. Such a\u00a0manipulative\u00a0use of pathos may alienate the audience or cause them to \u201ctune out\u201d. An example would be the American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (ASPCA) commercials featuring the song \u201cIn the Arms on an Angel<\/i>\u201d and footage of abused animals. Even Sarah McLachlan, the singer and spokesperson featured in the commercials, admits that she changes the channel because they are too depressing (Brekke, 2014).<\/span><\/p>\r\nEven if an appeal to pathos is not manipulative, such an appeal should complement rather than replace reason and evidence-based argument. In addition to making use of pathos, the author must establish her credibility (ethos) and must supply reasons and evidence (logos) in support of her position. An author who essentially replaces logos and ethos with pathos alone should be given low marks.<\/span><\/p>\r\nSee below for the most common fallacies that misuse appeals to pathos.<\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n
Fallacies That Misuse Appeals to\u00a0Pathos<\/h3>\r\nAppeal to fear: <\/b>using scare tactics; emphasizing threats or exaggerating possible dangers.<\/span>\r\nExample:\u00a0<\/span>\u201cWithout this additional insurance, you could find yourself broke and homeless.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\r\n<\/b>Appeal to guilt <\/b>and\u00a0appeal to pity<\/b>: trying to evoke an emotional reaction that will cause the audience to behave sympathetically even if it means disregarding the issue at hand.<\/span>\r\nExample:\u00a0<\/span>\u201cI know I missed assignments, but if you fail me, I will lose my financial aid and have to drop out.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\r\n<\/b>Appeal to popularity (bandwagon):<\/b> urging audience to follow a course of action because \u201ceveryone does it.\u201d<\/span>\r\nExample:\u00a0<\/span>\u201cNine out of ten shoppers have switched to Blindingly-Bright-Smile Toothpaste.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\r\n<\/b>Slippery Slope: <\/b>making an unsupported or inadequately supported claim that \u201cOne thing inevitably leads to another.\u201d This may be considered a fallacy of logos as well as pathos but is placed in this section because it often is used to evoke the emotion of fear.<\/span>\r\nExample:\u00a0<\/span>\u201cWe can\u2019t legalize marijuana; if we do, then the next thing you know people will be strung out on heroin.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\r\n<\/b>Appeal to the people:\u00a0<\/b>also called\u00a0stirring symbols\u00a0<\/b>fallacy; the communicator distracts the readers or listeners with symbols that are very meaningful to them, with strong associations or connotations.<\/span>\r\nExample: This fallacy is referred to in the sentence\u00a0<\/span>\u201cThat politician always wraps himself in the flag.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\r\n<\/b>Appeal to tradition:\u00a0<\/b>people have been done it a certain way for a long time; assumes that what has been customary in past is correct and proper.<\/span>\r\nExample:\u00a0<\/span>\u201cA boy always serves as student-body president; a girl always serves as secretary.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\r\n<\/b>Loaded-Language and other emotionally charged uses of language: <\/b>using slanted or biased language, including God terms, devil terms, euphemisms, and dysphemisms.<\/span>\r\nExample:\u00a0<\/span>In the sentence \u201cCutting access to food stamps would encourage personal responsibility,\u201d the god term is \u201cpersonal responsibility.\u201d It might seem as if it would be hard to argue against \u201cpersonal responsibility\u201d or related god terms such as \u201cindependence\u201d and \u201cself-reliance.\u201d However, it would require a definition of \u201cpersonal responsibility,\u201d combined with evidence from studies of people\u2019s behavior in the face of food stamp or other benefit reductions, to argue that cutting access to food stamps would lead to the intended results.<\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n[caption id=\"attachment_324\" align=\"aligncenter\" width=\"500\"]![\"Titled](\"https:\/\/s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com\/courses-images\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/107\/2016\/06\/12202945\/4550001017_4b6bb02d83_z.jpg\")
Here is an example of a common logical fallacy known as the ad hominem argument<\/i>, which is Latin for \"argument against the person\" or \"argument toward the person.\" Basically, an ad hominem argument goes like this: Person 1 makes claim X. There is something objectionable about Person 1. Therefore claim X is false.[\/caption]\r\nConclusion<\/h3>\r\n
<\/b>Fallacies can crop up whenever definitions, inferences, and facts are at issue. Once we become familiar with fallacies we may start to see them everywhere. That can be good and bad. Since persuasion is ever-present, it is good to be on guard against various hidden persuaders. But whether a persuasive strategy is considered fallacious may be dependent on context. For example, we\u00a0expect\u00a0<\/i>advertisements, political speeches, and editorials on public policy or ethical issues to try to sway us emotionally.<\/span><\/p>\r\nHowever, as a writer of logical argument, your task is to evaluate your draft in order to identify and eliminate inappropriate logical fallacies, which often try to argue through emotional means, personal attack, or inappropriate evidence and conclusions.\u00a0 Your purpose, as a writer of logical argument, is to get your reader to see the value in what you're asserting, to get that person to say \"I understand and accept the validity of your point of view,\" even though\u00a0he may still not agree.","rendered":"![\"Arrows](\"https:\/\/s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com\/courses-images\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/3033\/2016\/06\/27183318\/arrows-1262403_1920-300x212.png\")
<\/p>\n
One way to go about evaluating an argument for fallacies is to return to the concept of the three types of support for claims: ethos, logos, and pathos.<\/span><\/p>\nAs a quick reminder,<\/p>\n
\n- Ethos is an argument that appeals to ethics, authority, and\/or credibility.<\/li>\n
- Logos is an argument that appeals to logic.<\/li>\n
- Pathos is an argument that appeals to emotion.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n
Classifying fallacies as fallacies of ethos, logos, or pathos will help you both to understand their nature and to recognize them when you encounter them. Please keep in mind, however, that some fallacies may fit into multiple categories.<\/span><\/p>\n\n- Fallacies of ethos relate to credibility. These fallacies may unfairly build up the credibility of the author (or his allies) or unfairly attack the credibility of the author\u2019s opponent (or her allies).<\/span><\/span><\/li>\n
- Fallacies of logos\u00a0give an unfair advantage to the claims of the speaker or writer or an unfair disadvantage to his opponent\u2019s claims.<\/span><\/span><\/li>\n
- Fallacies of pathos rely excessively upon emotional appeals, attaching positive associations to the author\u2019s argument and negative ones to his opponent\u2019s position.<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n
Evaluating an Appeal to Ethos<\/span><\/h3>\nWhen you evaluate an appeal to\u00a0ethos, you examine how successfully a speaker or writer establishes authority or credibility with her intended audience. You are asking yourself what elements of the essay or speech would cause an audience to feel that the author is (or is not) trustworthy and credible.<\/span><\/p>\nA good speaker or writer leads the audience to feel comfortable with her knowledge of a topic. The audience sees her as someone worth listening to\u2014a clear or insightful thinker, or at least someone who is well-informed and genuinely interested in the topic.<\/span><\/p>\n\n
Some of the questions you can ask yourself as you evaluate an author\u2019s ethos may include the following:<\/span><\/p>\n\n- Has the writer or speaker cited her sources or in some way made it possible for the audience to access further information on the issue?<\/span><\/li>\n
- Does she demonstrate familiarity with different opinions and perspectives?<\/span><\/li>\n
- Does she provide complete and accurate information about the issue?<\/span><\/li>\n
- Does she use the evidence fairly? Does she avoid selective use of evidence or other types of manipulation of data?<\/span><\/li>\n
- Does she speak respectfully about people who may have opinions and perspectives different from her own?<\/span><\/li>\n
- Does she use unbiased language?<\/span><\/li>\n