Rhetoric, Rationalization, and Bad Argument Strategies

Informal Fallacies and Non-arguments

Argument from OutrageWhen anger functions as a premise

May use selective presentation to attempt to create, increase, or confirm feelings of anger

Argument from OutrageWhen anger functions as a premise

May use selective presentation to attempt to create, increase, or confirm feelings of anger

May attempt to justify letting anger over one thing influence judgment about another, unrelated thing

Argument from OutrageWhen anger functions as a premise

May use selective presentation to attempt to create, increase, or confirm feelings of anger

May attempt to justify letting anger over one thing influence judgment about another, unrelated thing

May simplistically attempt to focus anger on an easy target (scapegoating)

Dennis Miller on war with Iraq: “After 9/11, we had to do something!”

Scare Tactics/Argument by ForceWhen fear functions as a premise

May use selective presentation to attempt to create, increase, or confirm feelings of fear

Scare Tactics/Argument by ForceWhen fear functions as a premise

May use selective presentation to attempt to create, increase, or confirm feelings of fear

May attempt to justify letting fear of one thing influence judgment about another, unrelated thing

Scare Tactics/Argument by ForceWhen fear functions as a premise

May use selective presentation to attempt to create, increase, or confirm feelings of fear

May attempt to justify letting fear of one thing influence judgment about another, unrelated thing

Depends on inappropriate beliefs about what is feared

To consider: Stockholm (Hostage) Syndrome -- acceptance of captors’ beliefs by hostages

Argument from PityWhen sympathy functions as a premise

Occurs often as self-deception

Argument from PityWhen sympathy functions as a premise

Occurs often as self-deception May make calculated demands on

feelings of sympathy and compassion

Argument from PityWhen sympathy functions as a premise

Occurs often as self-deception May make calculated demands on

feelings of sympathy and compassion May result in assumption of inadequately

justified obligations

Argument from PityWhen sympathy functions as a premise

Occurs often as self-deception May make calculated demands on

feelings of sympathy and compassion May result in assumption of inadequately

justified obligations Can be mitigated by competent moral

reasoning

Argument from EnvyWhen jealousy motivates premises

Selection of premises may be influenced by irrelevant feelings

Unstated (assumed) premises are likely Likely to occur as interior rationalization

Apple PolishingWhen flattery motivates premises

Wishful ThinkingWhen hope or desire motivates premises

Fallacy includes as a premise the belief that thinking or wishing will change probability

Wishful ThinkingWhen hope or desire motivates premises

Fallacy includes as a premise the belief that thinking or wishing will change probability

Key “wishful thinking” premise may be an explicit metaphysical belief

Wishful ThinkingWhen hope or desire motivates premises

Fallacy includes as a premise the belief that thinking or wishing will change probability

Key “wishful thinking” premise may be an explicit metaphysical belief

May occur as interior rationalization, explanation of faith, or “cheerleading”

Peer Pressure/Group ThinkWhen need for approval or belonging

motivates premises

Claims accepted (function as true) because the group wants them accepted

Peer Pressure/Group ThinkWhen need for approval or belonging

motivates premises

Claims accepted (function as true) because the group wants them accepted

Known fact: people may change beliefs or interpretations if they find themselves in the minority, even in a group of strangers

Peer Pressure/Group ThinkWhen need for approval or belonging

motivates premises

Claims accepted (function as true) because the group wants them accepted

Known fact: people may change beliefs or interpretations if they find themselves in the minority, even in a group of strangers

As nationalism, may be actively used to discourage critical thinking

RationalizingWhen inauthentic premises are substituted

for true motives to justify a conclusion

Misdirects attention from potentially relevant facts or ideas

RationalizingWhen inauthentic premises are substituted

for true motives to justify a conclusion

Misdirects attention from potentially relevant facts or ideas

May constitute or result from self-deception

RationalizingWhen inauthentic premises are substituted

for true motives to justify a conclusion

Misdirects attention from potentially relevant facts or ideas

May constitute or result from self-deception

Substituted premises may also support unintended conclusions

Argument from Popularity/ Tradition/Common Practice

When a widely-held belief that something is true or right is deemed sufficient support Evidence supporting the belief or behavior

is not accessible for evaluation

Argument from Popularity/ Tradition/Common Practice

When a widely-held belief that something is true or right is deemed sufficient support Evidence supporting the belief or behavior

is not accessible for evaluation Tends to gather strength with repetition

Argument from Popularity/ Tradition/Common Practice

When a widely-held belief that something is true or right is deemed sufficient support Evidence supporting the belief or behavior

is not accessible for evaluation Tends to gather strength with repetition When group decisions have performative

power--as in most votes--what the group thinks actually can make a proposition true or make behavior right or wrong

Relativism/SubjectivismWhen truth is reduced to perspective

Matters of fact and matters of opinion must be treated differently

Relativism/SubjectivismWhen truth is reduced to perspective

Matters of fact and matters of opinion must be treated differently

Legitimate differences in perception must be acknowledged

Relativism/SubjectivismWhen truth is reduced to perspective

Matters of fact and matters of opinion must be treated differently

Legitimate differences in perception must be acknowledged

Cultural variables and prerogatives must be identified

Relativism/SubjectivismWhen truth is reduced to perspective

Matters of fact and matters of opinion must be treated differently

Legitimate differences in perception must be acknowledged

Cultural variables and prerogatives must be identified

Moral and ethical values are obvious cases in which preferences are decisive

Two Wrongs FallacyWhen wrong is taken for right

Begins with A harming B, or even being suspected of thinking harming B is OK

Two Wrongs FallacyWhen wrong is taken for right

Begins with A harming B, or even being suspected of thinking harming B is OK

B decides to engage in wrongful behavior just because A did or might

Two Wrongs FallacyWhen wrong is taken for right

Begins with A harming B, or even being suspected of thinking harming B is OK

B decides to engage in wrongful behavior just because A did or might

B’s decision is simply reactive, and not the outcome of reasoned inference

Red Herring/SmokescreenWhen irrelevancies obscure relevant ones

Both tend to introduce material that the audience will find attractive

Red Herring/SmokescreenWhen irrelevancies obscure relevant ones

Both tend to introduce material that the audience will find attractive

The red herring introduces distractions, especially ones that share significant features with the issue

Red Herring/SmokescreenWhen irrelevancies obscure relevant ones

Both tend to introduce material that the audience will find attractive

The red herring introduces distractions, especially ones that share significant features with the issue

The smokescreen introduces new topics and complications that obscure the issue