Fallacy of Evading the Question:

You avoid the central point of an argument, instead drawing attention to a minor (or side) issue. This fallacy is made to evade the issue by using techniques or modus operandi.

a. ARGUMENT TO THE MAN/PERSON (Ad hominem): "Ad Hominem" means "against the man" or "against the person."-this ignores real issues. It attacks the character or personality of an opponent. -the person asserting the argument or point is attacked instead of the validity of the argument or claim itself.-Here you attack a person's character, physical appearance, or personal habits instead of addressing the central issues of an argument. You focus on the person's personality, rather than on his/her ideas, evidence, or arguments. This type of attack sometimes comes in the form of character assassination (especially in politics). You must be sure that character is, in fact, a relevant issue.

This type of "argument" has the following form:Person A makes claim X.Person B makes an attack on person A.Therefore A's claim is false.

Bill: "I believe that abortion is morally wrong." Dave: "Of course you would say that, you're a priest." Bill: "What about the arguments I gave to support my position?" Dave: "Those don't count. Like I said, you're a priest, so you have to say that abortion is wrong. 

Ex. How can we elect John Smith as the new CEO of our department store when he has been through 4 messy divorces due to his infidelity? Why should we believe in the statement ok Ka Doming? He is an ex-convict. He was convicted once of murderer.

b. ARGUMENT TO THE PEOPLE(Ad populum): -it evades the issue by appealing to passions and prejudices of the populace.-This type of argument uses illegitimate emotional appeal, drawing on people's emotions, prejudices, and stereotypes. The emotion evoked here is not supported by sufficient, reliable, and trustworthy sources.

Ex. -We shouldn't develop our shopping mall here in East Vancouver because there is a rather large immigrant population in the area. There will be too much loitering, shoplifting, crime, and drug use.

c. ARGUMENT TO THE SYMPATHY/PITY (Argumentation Ad Misericardian):-it consist of pleading for mercy and leaving reason aside. We ignore the point of issue and appeal to our instinct to have compassion towards the needy, unfortunate, and the downtrodden.-instead of convincing of the other of the merits of one’s arguments, a show of the pitiful or miserable state or condition of the related fact or individual concerned is used to win the sympathy and agreement of the other.-whenever a person tries to cause the acceptance of a particular conclusion by arousing a feeling of pity.-The job of argument analysis is to judge when a given emotional appeal can be rightly criticized as an irrelevant or fallacious deception or distraction in the argument.

Ex.`Anthony cannot be given a failing grade because he is blind.`Go ahead. Judge me. My only fault is that I was born from a very poor family.`Your honour please, I appeal to you. Grant my client his acquittal. He has three very young kids. They cannot grow up not seeing and knowing their father. `i’ve been working hard in this course. Any grade below an A would adversely affect my chances to get into the nursing program. I should get an A in this course.

d. ARGUMENT TO THE MONEY (Argumentum Crumenam):-we commit this fallacy when we appeal to the sense of greed or cupidity of an individual. Instead of reasoning for an argument, we bribe and use money to defeat the opponent.

Ex.A jeepney driver who was caught by policemen for traffic violation uses money to settle arguments.

e. ARGUMENT TO THE IGNORANCE (Argumentum Ignatium):-we ignore the truth or falsity of a proposition and assert the truth because people are ignorant about it.

Ex.We cannot dispove the mermaids exist, therefore, this existence is true. Mermaids exist.

f. ARGUMENT TO FORCE/ APPEAL TO FORCE(Argumentum Ad Baculum):-we commit this fallacy when we ignore the real issue at hand and appeal to physical or moral pressure rather than to reason.-the person asserting the argument or point is attacked of the validity of the argument or claims itself. -use threat of force to cause acceptance of a proposition.Ex.`A teacher threatens her students that if they will not give her an outstanding performance rating in the evaluation survey, she will give them falling marks.`If you do not convict this murderer, one of you may be her next victim.`No, if you don’t mind losing a tire, going off the road, and maybe killing yourself, you don’t need a new tire.

g. ARGUMENT TO ONE’S OWN ADVANTAGE (Argumentum Pansarilum):-this argument is called an appeal to gain or profit. This fallacy is committed when we ignore the issue and appeal to a person to adopt a belief or policy in exchange for the advantage offered.

Ex.A man offers to a girl for her to study and finish a degree but in return, the girl should be his mistress.