4 Types of logic argument fallacies-英文論文 by 工藤志昊9歳

logic

There are 4 types of logic argument fallacies. Some are even used by politicians to gain support from the public. Today, I want to introduce you to these 4 types of logic argument fallacies. This is very useful to everyone sometimes in there life. We will go through all of these 4 types of logic argument fallacies one by one, and every type of fallacy will have some examples. So lets get started!

What’s an Argument?

Argument is a speech used for convincing listeners to believe a conclusion based on the premise, the part of an argument that talks about the reason about why you should believe in his/her conclusion.

Examples:

First Argument

I am the best cook in the world! Because I practice cooking everyday and I also got the cook license which is very difficult to get.

Second Argument

I practice cooking everyday and I also got the cook license which is very difficult to get. Therefore I am the best cook in the world.

So if we split both of these into reasons and the conclusion,
First Argument:

I am the best cook in the world! Because I practice cooking everyday and I also got the cook license which is very difficult to get.

  1. I practice cooking everyday.
  2. I got the cook license which is very difficult.

Conclusion: I am the best cook in the world.

Second Argument:

I practice cooking everyday and I also got the cook license which is very difficult to get. Therefore I am the best cook in the world.

  1. I practice cooking everyday.
  2. I got the cook license which is very difficult.

Conclusion: I am the best cook in the world.

You can see that these two arguments are the same in the inside even though it’s different on the outside. In this case, he/she is trying to convince us that he/she is the best cook in the world by providing 2 evidences, “I practice cooking everyday”, and “I got the cook license which is very difficult to get”. Evidences is most of the time starting with Because or Since, or ending with therefore, thus, hence, so, and then. These words that indicates where are the premises is called indicator words. And the evidence (or reasons) part of an argument is called premises. So in this example, “I practice cooking everyday.” and “I got the cook license which is very difficult.” are the premises. Because these two premises are followed by therefore in the second argument, and start with because in the first argument.

If you are looking at an argument that has no indicator words, then you can see if you can naturally insert any of the indicator words into the argument. If you can, you are looking at an argument. I strongly suggest therefore and because.

Two factors that makes up any argument

When you see a logic argument, how do you know that argument is a good argument that you can believe in, or a bad argument that you definitely don’t want to believe in? Will, every argument is made up of two very very very important factors. That is, valid/not valid arguments and good/bad arguments. So let’s talk about it for a while.

Valid or not valid arguments

We will assume that the premises of an argument is true even if it is not true, and if these premises will lead us to the conclusion, then, that argument is valid. So valid and not valid does not concern the content. All of the arguments that are in the following form is a valid argument:

All As are Bs,

C is an A,

Therefore C is an B.

Good or Bad arguments (also called well-groundedness)

If the premises of an argument is all true, then that argument is a well-grounded argument (or good argument). But if even one of the premises is false, then that argument is a bad argument.

If an argument is both valid and well-grounded, that argument is a sound argument. If we want sound arguments, we have to do a test on both validity and well-groundedness. Validity’s study is called formal logic, because it examines the form of an argument. Well-groundedness’s study is called informal logic.

Examples

First Argument

All Disney movies is interesting. Madagascar is a very interesting movie. Therefore Madagascar is a Disney movie.

All Disney movies is interesting does not mean that interesting movies are all Disney movies. So this argument is not valid. And so it’s not well-grounded too.

Second Argument

All phones are easy to break. Nexus 5x is a phone. Therefore, Nexus 5x is very easy to break.

This argument is valid. Because if all phones are easy to break, then the conclusion will be reasonable. But this argument is not well-grounded. Because not all phones are easy to break.

Third Argument

I learn programming everyday, and I also passed the programming exam. Therefore, I am a master at programming.

This is a sound argument, because it is valid and well-grounded.

Circular Argument

Circular Arguments have premises identical to the conclusion of that argument. For example:

My name is Bill, therefore my name is Bill.

The conclusion and the premise is basically the same.

Begging the question (politicians love this!)

Begging the question uses the power of the language to convince others.

I have a plan that will be cutting our expenses and make our sells boom. So you should let me be the leader of this company.

So it seams we should make him the leader of the company. But we don’t actually know what is the plan until this person release his plan. So we should not make him the leader of the company.

Equivocation

Equivocation changes the meaning of a word in an argument to convince someone.

He will definitely not book a hotel room. The reason is simple, he published his own book one year ago, and it was a very thick book. He spend a lot of times on it. So he hates writing a thick book.

The meaning of book is changed from “to arrange a reservation” to “a stack of pages”.

Distinction without a difference

Distinction without a difference separate two meanings that are the same.

A: Hey, the date yesterday was very fun.
B: It was not a date, we were just kissing and hugging in a restaurant with romantic music.

Actually date is equal to “kissing and hugging in a restaurant with romantic music”. So this is Distinction without a difference.

Conclusions

If you understand these four fallacies, you well able to recognize these fallacies in your own life. This is a very powerful tool to see if you can believe an argument or not. So if you hear someone trying to get you believe in something, you can just check if the argument is a sound argument or not.

英検1級,最年少,合格者,小学生,工藤志昊,小学校,最年少合格者