Types Of Fallacies

This paper will describe three types of logical fallacies. Logical fallacies are errors in reasoning. Once a person becomes familiar with them, they can identify logical fallacies in others' arguments. A person can also avoid using logical fallacies or use them to their advantage to convince others of something differentiates the facts from the fallacies, this could help people make a better and more productive decision

To define what a fallacy is one must understand what an argument is. An argument consists of one or more premises and one conclusion. A premise is a statement (a sentence that is either true or false) that is offered in support of the claim being made, which is the conclusion (which is also a sentence that is either true or false).

There are two main types of arguments: deductive and inductive. A deductive argument is an argument such that the premises provide (or appear to provide) complete support for the conclusion. An inductive argument is an argument such that the premises provide (or appear to provide) some degree of support (but less than complete support) for the conclusion. If the premises actually provide the required degree of support for the conclusion, then the argument is a good one. A good deductive argument is known as a valid argument and is such that if all its premises are true, then its conclusion must be true. If all the argument is valid and actually has all true premises, then it is known as a sound argument. If it is invalid or has one or more false premises, it will be unsound. A good inductive argument is known as a strong (or "cogent") inductive argument. It is such that if the premises are true, the conclusion is likely to be true. (http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/)

Persuasive communication is essentially based on a logically constructed argument that is strong enough to change the audience's opinion to agree with the conclusion Communication is an extremely important factor in our lives and much of the time is spent trying to persuade others towards our views. Logic and argumentation are central to persuasive communication. Persuasive communication will be defined in a way that the main objective of persuasion is to convince the audience of the thesis, the thesis being the conclusion of a discourse. An integral part of persuasive communication is argumentation and its format will be discussed. In order for a document to be persuasive it will be shown that it is necessary for it to contain a valid argument that lends support to the conclusion.

In logic, a fallacy is more than a mistaken belief; it is a flaw in the argument. Fallacies can be created intentionally because a person has an agenda or can be created by simple error.

Because a fallacy is not a sound argument, critical thinking requires that we be cautious of arguments that attempt to persuade us to an action or belief that intuitively is uncomfortable. A sound argument should persuade, but a persuasive person is not the same as a sound argument.

Ad Hominem arguments attack the source of an argument - not anything within the argument itself. The person presenting an argument is attacked instead of the argument itself. This takes many forms. For example, the person's character, nationality, or religion may be attacked. Alternatively, it may be pointed out that a person stands to gain from a favorable outcome. Or, finally, a person may be attacked by association, or by the company he keeps.

Perhaps the best example of this can be seen in the 1992 Presidential election in which President George Bush spent most of his campaign focusing on Governor Bill Clinton's character and not Clinton's platform.

There are three major forms of Attacking the Person: ad hominem (abusive): instead of attacking an assertion, the argument attacks the person who made the assertion. ad hominem (circumstantial): instead of attacking an assertion the author points to the relationship between the person making the assertion and the person's circumstances. ad hominem (tu quoque): this form of attack on the person notes that a person does not practice what he preaches. (http://www.intrepidsoftware.com/fallacy/attack.php)

Another type of fallacy is the Red herring argument: The name of