Comm 131 Ch 11

Front 1

fallacy claim

Back 1

asserts that an argument must be rejected because it violates a significant rule of argumentation relevant to the appropriate decision makers.

Front 2

incorrect logic

Back 2

fallacies are thought of as identifying this

Front 3

sophistry

Back 3

the use of plausible but fallacious reasoning

Front 4

tu quoque

Back 4

responding to a charge by making a counter charge

Front 5

begging the question

Back 5

to assume as true that which you are trying to prove; circular reasoning

Front 6

authority

Back 6

to assume a fact just because someone with high credibility says it so

Front 7

popularity

Back 7

claiming something is good because it is popular

Front 8

post hoc

Back 8

assuming a causal relation among events because they are related in time or space

Front 9

ad hominem

Back 9

criticizing a person rather than a person's ideas. ex) judging all Muslims because of terrorist attacks

Front 10

verbal aggression

Back 10

attacking the self-concept of another person; a type of ad hominem fallacy

Front 11

appeal to pity

Back 11

conveying extensive emotion in argument; fallacious depending on the context

Front 12

pragma-dialectical

Back 12

combination of normative rules with a pragmatic study of speech acts; aka a combination of a philosophical ideal of reasonableness with what people actually say in conversation

Front 13

deception

Back 13

when people purposely commit a fallacy; not likely to be forgiven

Front 14

refusal to reason

Back 14

to make a claim but refuse to give reasons for it. ex) a mom saying "because i told you so"

Front 15

cooperation

Back 15

argumentation occurs within a presumption of this; utterances made in argument should be topically relevant, expressed clearly, believed to be true, etc.

Front 16

irrelevant

Back 16

statements that are this can damage the critical process

Front 17

obfuscation

Back 17

an intent to make communication unclear in order to secure adherence from those who trust in the commitment to clarity

Front 18

quantity maxim

Back 18

saying more or less than would otherwise be appropriate

Front 19

conflict of interest

Back 19

withholding of relevant information

Front 20

reckless disregard

Back 20

making claims without verifying the truth