Informal Fallicies Of Philosophy

Front 1

o False dilemma

Back 1

 Forced into an either/or answer when the question has a third alternative (and neither alternative provided is amenable to your view)

Front 2

o Begging the Question

Back 2

 Argument assumes the truth of what is trying to be proved

Front 3

o Argument from Ignorance

Back 3

 Arguing a proposition is true simply because it has not been proven false; assumes something should be believed until it is proven false.

Front 4

o Equivocation

Back 4

 A misleading use of a term with more than one meaning or sense

Front 5

o Attacking the Person

Back 5

 Attacks a person or their character rather than the argument itself

Front 6

o Straw Man

Back 6

 Attack a weak form of the argument when stronger forms are to be offered

Front 7

o Appeal to Popularity

Back 7

 Endorses the truth of a claim based on its popular appeal

Front 8

o Composition

Back 8

Assuming that because all the parts have a characteristic, the whole has the same characteristic.

Front 9

o Division

Back 9

Assuming that because the whole has a characteristic that all the parts have that same characteristic

Front 10

o False Cause

Back 10

 Assumes without evidence that there is a causal link between two events

Front 11

o Hasty Generalization

Back 11

 Asked to accept a general conclusion because (unusual) cases support it.

Front 12

o Biased Generalizations

Back 12

 A generalization unjustified due to the sample not be selected randomly

Front 13

o Genetic Fallacy

Back 13

 The single issue focused on is the source or origin of an idea (belittles a position because of its beginnings)

Front 14

o Category Mistake

Back 14

 Error in thinking that occurs when it mixes up two ideas that do not belong in the same category

Front 15

o Faulty analogy

Back 15

 Belief in Jesus is on par with belief in the flying spaghetti monster

Front 16

o Special Pleading

Back 16

 Argument where only the evidence favoring a view is cited, and the rest is left out