Fallacy Hunt

BP Debate:

 

 This House Believes that acts of violence to protect the Environment souled be justified.

 

PM Speech

 

Fallacy #1

Comparing wars in the past to why violence should be okay in the future over the environment. ---This is a Logical Fallacy specifically False Analogy --- You cannot compare wars over people's lives such as WWI or WWII to justify having war over the environment. It's also foolish to make that argument since it would be just as harmful if not more harmful to have a war over the environment trying to protect certain parts of it.

 

Fallacy #2

Shell cooperation in Nigeria "flaring gas while drilling causing the people to have cancer." --- This is a Material Fallacy specifically Reference to authority. --- It is not common knowledge what goes on in Nigeria and how the gas companies operate. Also, that's a cute story with no credibility or authority.

 

Fallacy #3

Violence should be an option to protect the environment. --- This is a Logical Fallacy specifically common sense. --- You cannot fight evil with evil. To protect the environment using violence is an oxymoron to the goal that you want to accomplish.

 

Margaret Thatcher Speech

 

Fallacy #4

The opposition leader said that there is more teachers than ever before in UK school systems. --- This is a Material Fallacy specifically Sample unrepresentative. --- Margaret responded by explained how the population rose and how there are more students than ever before in school systems and in higher education, so that is not a credible positive attribute to give to the Opposition Leader.

 

Fallacy #5

Citizens owning houses are not better because of a particular story that a man is being evicted from his home because he cannot pay his mortgage. --- This is a Logical fallacy specifically Single Cause. --- This is one situation and one circumstances and that owning your own home is actually better for the economy.

 

 

Sources:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gDpKySqNRpM&feature=channel

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gbCQMiXdcCw

 

Assignment:

 

1. Describe the context of the speech or debate. Restate or quote the example. 2. Label the example as one of the fallacies or show what specific test of evidence that it violates. 3. Refute the fallacy, saying what you think is wrong with it. So, you should have five examples of fallacies and five ways to refute the fallacy.

Chapter 2 - Identifying and Testing Inductive Arguments

Exercise 2 - Russia: Moscow mayor fired.

Argument #1

Russia is regressing back to the days of Stalin.
Luzhkov was fired on the grounds of broken trust between President Medvedev. - No evidence was presented to the public for ground of termination.

Luzhkov served as Moscow's mayor for 18 years. He was more than qualified to stay in his position.

Russia is regressing backwards and the citizens need to be cautious.

Argument #2

President Medvedev has too much power and control.

President Medvedev dismissed Moscow's mayor of 18 years with no tangible proof.

Moscow's MayorLuzhkov believes it was because he was causing tension.

President Medvedev is exercising too much control and power.

Sources:
http://www.cnn.com/2010/WORLD/europe/09/29/russia.moscow.mayor/index.html
http://rt.com/Politics/2010-09-28/president-luzhkov-dismissal-moscow.html
http://rt.com/Politics/2010-09-09/russia-kremlin-mayor-response.html

Exercise 4 - Analogies

"Democracy does not work in a family. Parents should have the ultimate say because they are wiser and their children do not know what is best for themselves. Similarly the best form of government for a society is not a democratic one but one where the leaders are more like parents."

The interest between governement and citizens is vastly different than that of parents towards their children, which is love. Also, it is unrealistic to have a democracy about rules and things that are a must in a family. The parents need to hold that ultimate control.


Source:
http://philosophy.hku.hk/think/arg/analogy.php

Burden of Proof - Chapter 1

Exercise 2

 1. Sarah Palin at Restoring Honor Rally:

     Ethos - Her credibility for this speech was being the mother of a Marine.
     Pathos - She was passionate. It reflected in her voice fluctuation, hand gestures and body language.
     Logos - She used stories/past experiences of military veterans.

2. President Obama's Speech on End of Iraq War

    Ethos - His credibility is acting as Commander-in-Chief of the armed forces.
    Pathos - His emotions for the speech was not evident.
    Logos - His logic and reasoning was well spoken. He had many advisors supporting his decision and clearly stated the plan for the "End of the Iraq War."

3. Any Commercial - Old Spice

   Ethos - The credibility is coming from someone that uses the product.
   Pathos - His emotions are evident that he enjoys the product and what benifits he gets from it.
   Logos - His logic is that when you smell good you will ge the things you want and can only imagine.


Exercise 4:

 1. Major Premise: All Borisov's family members are smart.
     Minor Premise: I am a Borisov family member.
     Conclusion: I am smart.

2. Major Premise: Northwest costs $32,000 a year to attend.
    Minor Premise: I attend Northwest University.
    Conclusion: I owe $32,000.

3. Major Premise: Life is always changing.
    Minor Premise: I am living.
    Conclusion: I am always changing.

4. Major Premise: All people in this class have homework.
    Minor Premise: I am in this class.
    Conclusion: I have homework.

5. Major Premise: People that are crazy enough to think they can change the world actually do.
    Minor Premise: I am crazy enough to think that I can change the world.
    Conclusion: I can change the world.