4 Common Informal Logical Fallacies You Need to Know!

Hello friends!  In Philosophy, logic rules the day as the foundation of proper reasoning and right thinking.  If you're unable to identify logical inconsistencies in arguments, ideas, concepts, and principles, it can leave you susceptible to false ideologies and teaching.  There are tens, if not hundreds of formal and informal logical fallacies within the philosophical discipline, but some are more prevalent than others.  In this post, we will explore the four most common informal fallacies in our culture today and how to combat them.

1. Ad Hominem

Ad hominem is Latin for "against the man".  This is one of the most prevalent logical fallacies deployed in today's society in all areas of social discord.  Why?  Because it's easy and people enjoy tearing another person down.  This logical fallacy is when; rather than attacking the argument of your opponent, you attack the person themselves or the person's character instead.

A simple way to tell you're winning an argument is when the other person stops attacking your points, premise, or opinion, and begins to attack you instead.  "Your argument is wrong because you're a jerk!"  Interesting.  How should you respond to such an assault?  Maybe try, "Ok, but what does that have to do with my point?  Being a jerk has no barring on the validity of my argument or its merit."  Don't let someone off the hook in addressing the issue at hand, while attempting to discredit your stance by slandering you.  Keep the conversation about the points not the person.

2. Straw Man

You ever watch The Wizard of Oz with the scare crow who had no brain?  In addition to not having a brain, real scare crows (or Straw Men) don't have any life, or strength, or courage, or...really anything that would allow them to fight back in an argument.  This fallacy is when someone takes your argument out of context and misrepresents it as something easier to combat, and attacks that false representation instead. Once the stronger argument is supplanted, the new, easier target is knocked down as easy as...you guessed it...a straw man.  An example would be saying you're for the second amendment and the response is you must want children to be killed.  This is obviously not the position of the initial statement, but it's easier to argue against child murder than constitutional rights, so the straw man takes it's place and the onslaught begins.  Be sure to carry your matches to burn down the straw men when erected.

How should you respond?  Reaffirm your argument, and clearly state your position. Ask the person to restate your position to ensure they understand it correctly.  Focus on one topic or issue at a time to prevent confusion.

3. Circular Logical

Ring around the rosy, pocket full of posies...  This argument is common when a person is repeating stances or slogans heard from within the present culture.  This fallacy is when someone's argument repeats what was previously stated without making or coming to a new conclusion.  It can be extremely frustrating if one refuses to recognize the logical inconsistency and restates the same error over and over.  I believe the Bible is God's Word because the Bible says it's God's Word. Wait, what?  So, the Bible is God's Word because the Bible says it's God's Word?  That doesn't make any sense, right?  Yet, you hear it stated all the time.  You emphasize this error by asking for the reason why they believe the Bible is God's Word.  Here's where it can get tricky, because most will just rinse and repeat the same thing...again.  Or, they will give up and end the conversation in exacerbation over your lack of understanding.

Try to show grace when addressing these errors in a person's thought.  Ask questions to direct them to a better way to express their point and convey their meaning.  This can take some effort, but if you show care in your approach, and demonstrate a true want to understand, they may come to a more concise point that can be given a more deserving treatment.

4. Self-Defeating or Self-Refuting Argument

These tend to be fairly simple to point out once you learn to pick up the cues.  If you learn how to identify this logical fallacy, it will prevent a lot of brain constipation in conversation.  Have you ever heard the statement, "You have your truth, and I have mine."?  Or, how about this, "All truth is relative."  These statements contradict themselves by not being able to meet their own standard.  To the first statement you should ask a question: "Is that statement true for everybody or just for you?"  For the second, "Is that relatively true or is it true for everybody?"  These statements do not live up to the claim.  The statements themselves are presented as objective truths not relative or subjective truths.  The person truly believes these statements are true for all people, in all places, at all times.  This would make it objectively true and therefore defeat the claim itself.  If they don't believe that, then the claim is irrelevant because it only applies to them so no one else should care about it.  We can go on with our lives without worry of someone's relative truth about their own reality.

There are many ways to be mislead with the technology of today's world.  With 24/7 newsfeeds, social media allowing common pundits to funnel continual information and opinions on all sorts of topics, and we the people left to discern the truth from all the falsehoods.  Logic and right-thinking is no longer taught in our schools, so we must train our minds to be guarded from the charade.  I pray these concepts help to equip you for identifying the deception and calling it out...with grace and love, as I have learned, in a debate, the first one to get upset...loses.  So keep your cool.

Graciously,

E. R. Jennings

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Thought-Full Encouragement: When distressed, Trust in the Lord.

Thought-Full Encouragement: Failure is Just the Beginning

Thought-Full Encouragement for the Week: "Don't Hesitate to Accept God's Gift"