Keeping it logical
We are surrounded by logic fallacies! Politics drowns it them. Cable news floods us with them. Twitter requires them.
This generation needs Christ-followers who can write to convince readers of truthfulness and compel them to action (have I asserted this before?) Our writing should persuade. One of the biggest hindrances to writing with a compelling argument is the logic fallacy. If we don’t have all the facts, haven’t thought deeply on these, and edited our words so they are convincing, we can often fall back on a fallacy to seek to strengthen our argument. Readers can see through this quickly and discount the rest of your argument.
The following is a list of the fallacies we can easily fall into when we seek to persuade others. Please avoid these in your essays:
Ad Hominem; This fallacy also uses distraction to attempt to win an argument or convince the reader by attacking or drawing attention to the person or character instead of the opposing argument itself. (This can’t be true because of who said it!)
Ad Populum (to the people) or Ad Verecundiam (“to the authorities): These two fallacies are similar and make an appeal to some nebulous group of people or some anonymous group of authorities or authorities that are not really authorities. The writer appeals to the emotions and to the support of false authorities (One says “you should believe this because everybody else does;” the other says “you can trust this because the experts agree with it.”)
Bandwagon Appeal: This fallacy is another name for Ad Populum.
Card Stacking or Cherry Picking: This fallacy is common, especially when one badly wants to convince the reader, but knows there are other logical sides to the argument or issue. The writer stacks evidence or reasons that only support the desired conclusion at the neglect of other very compelling evidence for other sides.
False Dilemma: This fallacy is also called the Either-Or or the All-or-nothing Fallacy. Most arguments are more complicated and have more than two sides. Readers (and writers) can see that issues have more than a choice of two solutions. This argument often comes out of a dogmatic approach to issues.
Faulty Analogy: This fallacy is used when the writer draws a comparison or analogy in an extended fashion, even though it may relate only slightly or not at all.
Hasty of Over-Generalization – This fallacy develops when the writer tries to build our argument on minimal evidence or tries to stretch the conclusion beyond what the facts can support. The writer does this when he or she hasn’t researched enough or is trying to prove a “pre-conceived result” that there is not really proof of.
Hypostatization: This fallacy takes an abstract idea and gives it concrete character. The writer may seek to support an argument by appealing to emotion through using abstract ideas believed in and making them have concrete and real elements.
Non Sequitor: This fallacy is the result of trying to prove something by using unrelated facts. One doesn’t follow the other. Again, it’s the result of trying to convince someone of a preconception without good evidence. (A Biblical term might be “eisegesis” – reading into the facts results that aren’t there.)
Oversimplification: This fallacy is like the Over-Generalization Fallacy and makes an issue far simpler than it really is. The writer ignores the possible complexity in order to neatly wrap up a fallacious solution.
Red Herring: This is a “sleight of hand” use of words. The writer may have a weak argument in development, and introduce another topic or aspect that will catch the reader’s attention and leave him or her thinking initial argument is completed (as in “look over here, at this red herring!”)
Slippery Slope: This fallacy is one everyone has heard of – the writer doesn’t like a solution since it doesn’t support his or her position, and assumes that other really bad things will naturally follow if it’s followed. The bad things that the Slippery Slope imagines will follow are genuinely bad, but won’t necessarily follow.
Straw Man: This fallacy develops when the writer takes one point, usually the weakest or least significant one, and rails against it. One tries to solve the issue by choosing one out of many elements and declares the issue won even though only one small point is addressed. (These are standard fallacies and full explanations, examples, and ways to avoid them can easily be researched.
To Beg the Question: This fallacy develops when the writer tries to solve a problem or prove a truth that he or she has not yet built a case for. The reader “begs the question” of why the writer is arguing for a solution to a problem he or she has not convince the reader of in the first place.
(These are some of the common fallacies that can creep into our logic and persuasion. You can research each and find examples, further descriptions, and additional ways to avoid each.)
Professor Harrell
