Fallacies (Methods of Philosophizing)

Summary

In this educational video, Anna introduces viewers to the art of argumentation and fallacies in philosophy. She explains that arguments are meant to persuade through reason, not aggression, and contrasts them with fights. Anna then delves into the concept of fallacies, illustrating common types such as ad hominem, ad baculum, ad misericordium, and others, which rely on faulty reasoning. The video aims to equip viewers with the ability to identify and avoid these logical pitfalls, enhancing critical thinking and the quality of discourse.

Takeaways

• 😀 Welcome to the video! Today's topic is about arguments and fallacies, a key area under the methods of philosophizing.
• 🧐 An argument is defined as a series of statements that provide reasons to convince a reader or listener that an opinion is truthful. It's different from fighting, which is more about expressing anger without logical reasoning.
• 🧠 Logic is the branch of philosophy that focuses on the analysis of arguments, ensuring they are based on sound reasoning rather than faulty logic.
• ❌ Fallacies are arguments based on faulty reasoning. They violate the rules of logical thought but often appear convincing.
• 🚫 An 'ad hominem' fallacy attacks a person rather than their argument, focusing on personal characteristics instead of evidence.
• ⚠️ An 'ad baculum' fallacy uses threats or force to advance an argument, pressuring others through fear rather than reason.
• 🙏 The 'ad misericordiam' fallacy appeals to pity or emotion to persuade, relying on sympathy rather than logical evidence.
• 👥 'Ad populum' is a fallacy that appeals to the popularity of a belief as evidence of its truth, assuming something is true because many people believe it.
• 📜 The 'appeal to tradition' fallacy assumes an idea is correct simply because it has been traditionally accepted, without examining its current relevance or validity.
• 🔄 'Circular reasoning' or 'begging the question' occurs when an argument's conclusion is assumed in its premises, providing no real evidence and merely restating the conclusion.

Q & A

What is an argument according to the video?

An argument is defined as a series of statements that provide reasons to convince a reader or listener that an opinion is truthful. It is made with the assumption that a certain claim is yet to be determined.

How does the video distinguish between arguing and fighting?

The video explains that arguing involves using reason and logic to come to an agreement, whereas fighting is about expressing anger or hurt without sensitivity to the choice of words. Arguing can resolve conflicts, while fighting usually exacerbates them.

What branch of philosophy focuses on the analysis of arguments?

The branch of philosophy that focuses on the analysis of arguments is Logic.

What are fallacies, and how do they relate to logic?

Fallacies are arguments based on faulty reasoning. In the context of logic, they are like fouls or violations in a sport because they violate the rules of logical thought, even though they might seem plausible or convincing.

What is the ad hominem fallacy, and can you provide an example?

Ad hominem is a fallacy where the argument focuses on attacking the person instead of the argument or evidence. An example is: 'Why would I believe you? You're not even the smartest person in our section.'

What is the ad misericordium fallacy, and what does it appeal to?

Ad misericordium, or appeal to pity, is a fallacy that strongly appeals to sympathy and emotion. For example, a student might say, 'Ma'am, please accept my late submission of modules. I spent the last 5 days with only 4 hours of sleep each day.'

Can you explain the fallacy of appeal to tradition with an example?

The fallacy of appeal to tradition assumes that something is right because it has been done a certain way for a long time. For example, 'Courtship is necessary and should always be done before entering into a relationship because that is the tradition in the Philippines.'

What is the slippery slope fallacy, and how does it exaggerate outcomes?

The slippery slope fallacy assumes that a small action will lead to extreme outcomes. For instance, 'If we allow our 16-year-old to have her first boyfriend, what's next, a baby?' This fallacy exaggerates the expected outcome of a small initial action.

What is the fallacy of composition, and how does it differ from the fallacy of division?

The fallacy of composition assumes that what is true of a part is true for the whole, e.g., 'Because all components of this car are light and easy to carry, the car itself must also be light and easy to carry.' In contrast, the fallacy of division assumes that what is true for the whole is true for its parts, e.g., 'The boys in our neighborhood like to play volleyball, so my new neighbor Jacob would surely like to play volleyball too.'

Why is it important to detect and avoid fallacies in arguments?

Understanding and detecting fallacies is important because it enriches the quality of discussions and helps in making the right decisions. Fallacies are based on faulty reasoning, and even if they seem convincing, they violate the rules of logical thought.

Outlines

00:00

📚 Introduction to Arguments and Fallacies

Anna welcomes viewers back to the channel and introduces the topic of arguments and fallacies in philosophy. She emphasizes the difference between arguments, which are meant to convince through reason, and fighting, which involves expressing anger without logical structure. Anna then poses a question to the audience about the branch of philosophy that deals with argument analysis, revealing 'logic' as the correct answer. She also introduces the concept of fallacies, which are arguments based on faulty reasoning that may seem plausible but violate logical thought rules.

05:01

🤔 Common Fallacies in Argumentation

This paragraph delves into various types of fallacies, starting with ad hominem, where the person is attacked rather than the argument. Anna provides examples for each fallacy, including ad baculum (appeal to force), ad misericordium (appeal to pity), ad populum (appeal to the majority), and ad verecundium (appeal to authority). She explains how these fallacies manipulate the audience's emotions or rely on the authority of an individual without substantial evidence, thus misleading them.

10:01

🔍 Detecting Logical Fallacies in Everyday Arguments

Anna continues to describe additional fallacies such as appeal to tradition, begging the question, fallacy of composition, fallacy of division, post hoc (cause and effect), and slippery slope. Each fallacy is explained with an example to illustrate how they work and why they are flawed. She stresses the importance of recognizing these fallacies to avoid being deceived by seemingly convincing but logically unsound arguments.

15:02

🛡️ The Importance of Logical Argumentation

In the final paragraph, Anna challenges viewers to identify fallacies in articles or social media statements, encouraging critical thinking and the detection of faulty reasoning. She reflects on the importance of being aware of fallacies to maintain the quality of discussions and make informed decisions. Anna concludes the lesson with a quote from George Bernard Shaw about the dangers of selective belief in arguments and thanks viewers for watching, wishing them well.

Keywords

💡Arguments

An argument is defined as a series of statements that provide reasons to convince a reader or listener that an opinion is truthful. The video emphasizes that arguments differ from fighting because they use reason and logic to resolve conflicts rather than expressing anger. This concept is central to the video's theme of understanding logical reasoning.

💡Fallacies

Fallacies are arguments based on faulty reasoning that violate the rules of logical thought. The video explains that fallacies often seem plausible or convincing but are ultimately flawed. Understanding fallacies is essential to distinguishing between valid and invalid arguments, which is a key theme of the video.

💡Ad Hominem

Ad Hominem is a fallacy that involves attacking the person instead of addressing their argument. The video provides an example where someone dismisses another's opinion by attacking their intelligence. This fallacy is highlighted to show how personal attacks can distract from logical reasoning.

💡Ad Baculum

Ad Baculum, also known as appeal to force, is a fallacy where someone uses threats or force to advance their argument. The video illustrates this with an example where a person warns others not to mess with them because of their powerful father. This fallacy shows how fear can be used to manipulate arguments.

💡Ad Misericordiam

Ad Misericordiam, or appeal to pity, is a fallacy that involves appealing to emotions rather than logic. The video provides an example of a student asking for leniency from a teacher by emphasizing their exhaustion. This fallacy highlights how emotions can cloud logical judgment.

💡Ad Populum

Ad Populum, or appeal to the people, is a fallacy where an idea is presented as true because many people believe it. The video uses the example of a popular TV channel to demonstrate how this fallacy works. It shows how popularity does not necessarily equate to truth.

💡Ad Verecundiam

Ad Verecundiam, or appeal to authority, is a fallacy that relies on the authority of an expert or figure without providing additional evidence. The video mentions the example of believing in the non-existence of UFOs solely because a famous astronomer said so. This fallacy warns against blindly trusting authority without critical thinking.

💡Appeal to Tradition

Appeal to Tradition is a fallacy that assumes something is correct because it has always been done that way. The video uses the example of courtship being necessary before entering a relationship because it is a long-standing tradition. This fallacy is used to show how traditional practices are not always logically justified.

💡Begging the Question

Begging the Question is a fallacy where the conclusion is assumed in the premise, leading to circular reasoning. The video explains this with the example of someone claiming they have the right to free speech, therefore no one can stop them from talking. This fallacy demonstrates how arguments can be self-reinforcing without providing actual evidence.

💡Slippery Slope

Slippery Slope is a fallacy that assumes a small action will lead to extreme outcomes. The video uses the example of parents fearing that allowing their teenager to date will inevitably lead to pregnancy. This fallacy highlights the dangers of exaggerating potential consequences without evidence.

Highlights

Introduction to the topic of arguments and fallacies in philosophy.

Invitation to subscribe and engage with the channel for more educational content.

Definition of an argument as a series of statements providing reasons to support a claim.

Differentiation between arguments and fighting, emphasizing the importance of reason and logic in arguments.

Identification of logic as the branch of philosophy that focuses on the analysis of arguments.

Explanation of fallacies as arguments based on faulty reasoning that may seem plausible but violate logical thought.

Description of the ad hominem fallacy, which involves attacking the person rather than the argument.

Illustration of the ad baculum fallacy, using threats or force to advance an argument.

Example of the ad misericordiam fallacy, appealing to pity or emotion to persuade.

Discussion of the ad populum fallacy, where popularity is used as a reason for the truth of a claim.

Explanation of the ad verecundium fallacy, relying on the authority of an expert without additional evidence.

Introduction of the appeal to tradition fallacy, assuming that something is right because it has been done traditionally.

Definition of begging the question fallacy, where the conclusion is assumed without evidence.

Description of the fallacy of composition, assuming that what is true for a part is true for the whole.

Explanation of the fallacy of division, assuming that what is true for the whole is true for its parts.

Illustration of the post hoc fallacy, attributing causality based on the sequence of events.

Discussion of the slippery slope fallacy, assuming a small action will lead to extreme outcomes.

Emphasis on the importance of detecting and avoiding fallacies to make informed decisions and enrich discussions.

Assignment to find and identify fallacies in articles or social media statements as a learning exercise.

Conclusion of the lesson with a quote by George Bernard Shaw about the dangers of selective belief.

Closing remarks and sign-off, encouraging viewers to stay safe and engage with the channel.

Transcripts

hi everyone it's been a while

i'm anna and welcome to our channel

if you're returning welcome back so for

today's video lessons

we're going to talk about

arguments

and fallacies

if you are interested to learn more

about this

then continue watching by the way

don't forget to like and subscribe to

our channel

and hit the bell notification to see

more of our videos

so come on and let's learn another topic

under the methods of philosophizing

but first let's have a recap

from the last video i've mentioned about

arguments and can you still recall

what is meant by arguments

from the last video i mentioned about

arguments

which is defined as a series of

statements

which provides reasons

that convince a reader or a listener

that an opinion is truthful

an argument is made with the assumption

that

a certain claim is yet to be determined

argument is not the same as fighting

because fighting is all about expressing

anger or hurt without being sensitive to

your choice of words

so if you don't know how to argue

with reason and logic then that is what

you call

fighting however an

argument is all about coming into

an agreement argument

if you know how to do it right can

resolve

conflicts or differences

well fighting usually makes them worse

now my question is which do you think

is the branch of philosophy

which focuses on the analysis of

arguments

if logic is your answer

then you are correct

now there are a number of arguments

that are based on faulty reasoning

this kind of arguments are called

fallacies if logic

was a sport then fallacies

would be the fouls or the violations

fallacies violate the rules of logical

thought but often seem plausible or

convincing

here are the commonly heard fallacies

so let's start with ad

hominem

or against the person

the characteristics of ad hominem

are attacking the person and

the focus uh it focuses

our attention on people rather than on

arguments or evidence

why would i believe you you're not even

the smartest person

in our section

so in this example the individual

attacks the person and not the opinion

or his or her opinion

next fallacy is add

bakulum

or appeal to force

the characteristic of add loom is

using threat or force or

an undesirable event to advance

an argument so for example

my father is known to be the richest man

in this town

i'm sure you know what he is capable of

don't should there mess up with me

so in this example the individual

threatens the person

if ever he or she messed up

with him the next fallacy is

which is actually common

is add misericordium

this is very common

add misery cordium or appeal

to pt

pity or emotion

so from the word misery it means

it appeals to pity so it so

it suggests a strong appeal

to sympathy and pt

so for example ma'am please

accept my late submission of modules

i spent the last 5 days with

4 hours of sleep each day

working extra time on it so please ma'am

accept it

that is an example of ad misericordia

so in this example the student tries to

convince a teacher

through appealing to his or her or to

the teacher's

emotion the next one

is ad papalum

or appeal

to the people

in ad populum the idea presented

must be true because many or most people

believe it for example

you should turn to channel six it's the

most

watched channel this year in this

example

many people watch channel 6.

therefore you also have to watch it

next is add virikundium

or appeal to

authority

the characteristic of advercundium

is insisting that a claim is true

simply because a valid authority or

expert on the issue said it was true

without

any other supporting evidence offered

example ufos

do not exist because

carl sagan or sagan said it

so carl sagan is a famous astronomer

so you have to believe him so even

without

any other supporting ideas or evidence

the person convinces you to believe

in him or her because of the authority

he mentioned

another fallacy is appeal

the tradition

appeal to tradition assumed

that the idea is acceptable because

something has been done a certain way

for a long time

or traditionally so it is necessarily

the right way of doing it

example courtship is necessary

and should always be done before

entering into relationship

because that is the first step

in showing or telling how

men loves and respects

the woman and her family

so this is an example of appeal to

tradition

because here in the philippines it is

our

tradition that the man should court

the woman before marriage or before

entering into

a serious relationship

another fallacy is begging

the question

begging the question simply accepts the

conclusion without providing real

evidence the argument either relies on a

premise

that says the same thing as a conclusion

which you might hear referred to

as being circular or circular

reasoning or simply ignores an important

but questionable assumption that the

argument

rests on example i have the right to

free speech

so you cannot stop me from talking

next fallacy is fallacy

of composition

fallacy of composition assumes

that what is true of a part is

true for the whole example

because all of the components of this

car are light and easy to carry

then the car itself must also be

light and easy to carry

so you assume that since

the parts are light and easy

so is the car as a whole

next one is fallacy of division

fallacy of division assumes

that what is true for the whole is

true for its parts so it is

the opposite of the fallacy of

composition

example the boys in our neighborhood

like to play volleyball so

my new neighbor jacob

would surely like to play volleyball

with them you assume

that your new neighbor jacob

will also love to play volleyball

so what is true for the whole may also

be true

to its parts

now the next one is

past hawk

or post hoc

ergo propter

or in english cause an effect

this one simply means that one

event is said to be the cause of a later

event simply because it occurred

earlier example ever since

you bought that bag everything has been

going wrong

in your life this post it

that may be the reason why you are

unhappy

so in the example the cause there is the

back

and the effect is the unhappiness of the

person

another famous fallacy is

the slippery slope

the characteristic of the slippery slope

is

assuming a very small action will lead

to

extreme outcomes

example if we allow our 16 year old

to have her first boyfriend

what's next a baby

as i mentioned in the example

the parents either the mother or the

father

assumes that having a boyfriend

will lead to pregnancy there is an

exaggeration of the expected outcome

so these are the fallacies

that we frequently hear each day

and maybe you're also using that in

order to persuade

the other person to believe in you

don't be deceived by a seemingly

plausible

ideas you might fall into their trap

so watch out remember

understanding that some arguments may

contain

fallacies is one of the great marks

of a well-educated mind and it greatly

enriches the quality of discussions

being able to detect them and

avoid them will surely help the person

in making the right decision

take note these are

examples of fallacies

that is they are based on faulty

reasoning

no matter how good they may seem to

appear they still violate

the rules of logical thought so

don't argue by using this

fallacies argue with

reason and logic as an activity

i want you to look for an article

or any statements from the social media

and detect or determine whether the

statement or the argument

is a type of fallacy and what

kind of fallacy is that

i hope through this lesson he'll be able

to determine or to

distinguish which is a fallacy

or not i want you to reflect

on this the moment we want to believe

something we suddenly see all the

arguments for

it and become blind to the arguments

against it by george

bernard shaw

that's so that's it i hope you have

learned something from our lesson

i want to see you again next time thanks

for watching

god bless everyone stay safe and

[Music]

[Applause]

bye

you