3.2 Fallacies Of Relevance Part 2

Summary

This video covers the fallacies of relevance, focusing on the last four types in section 3.2. These fallacies occur when premises are irrelevant to the conclusion, often used to manipulate or distract. The video explains the policy of accident, straw man, missing the point, and red herring fallacies, providing examples for each. These fallacies include misapplying general rules, distorting an argument, drawing conclusions that don't follow from premises, and changing the subject to avoid addressing the original issue. The lesson emphasizes the importance of recognizing these fallacies for logic exams and critical thinking.

Takeaways

• 😀 Fallacies of relevance occur when premises are logically irrelevant to the conclusion, often leading to manipulative reasoning.
• 😀 The fallacy of accident involves applying a general rule to a situation where it doesn’t apply, potentially causing harm or misjudgment.
• 😀 A classic example of the fallacy of accident is applying the right to property to a drunken man wanting his gun back, which could be dangerous.
• 😀 The straw man fallacy is committed when someone misrepresents or distorts another person's argument, making it easier to attack.
• 😀 A well-known example of the straw man fallacy is misinterpreting an argument against prayer in public schools as an attack on atheism and its association with Russian communism.
• 😀 Missing the point occurs when a conclusion is drawn that doesn't follow logically from the premises, often leading to irrelevant or faulty conclusions.
• 😀 An example of missing the point is concluding that the death penalty should be reinstated based on rising crime rates, instead of exploring more relevant solutions like community programs.
• 😀 The red herring fallacy happens when someone introduces a distraction or changes the subject, steering the argument away from the original issue.
• 😀 A red herring example includes shifting a discussion on eliminating pesticides to an unrelated topic about the health benefits of vegetables.
• 😀 Recognizing these fallacies is crucial for logical argumentation and is essential for quizzes and exams, as it demonstrates the ability to evaluate reasoning correctly.

Q & A

What are fallacies of relevance?

Fallacies of relevance occur when the premises of an argument are logically irrelevant to the conclusion. In other words, the premises do not logically support or lead to the conclusion, even though they may seem convincing or manipulative.

What is the fallacy of accident?

The fallacy of accident occurs when a general rule is applied to a situation where it does not apply or was not intended to apply. For example, the rule 'everyone has a right to their property' may be misapplied when a drunken man demands his gun, which could lead to dangerous consequences.

How is the straw man fallacy committed?

The straw man fallacy is committed when someone misrepresents or distorts another person's argument to make it easier to attack. Instead of addressing the original argument, the person refutes a weakened or distorted version of it, making their counter-argument appear stronger.

Can you give an example of the straw man fallacy from the transcript?

In the transcript, a speaker misrepresents Mr. Goldberg's argument against prayer in public schools by twisting it into an argument for atheism, implying it leads to suppression of religion, which is a distorted version of the original argument.

What is the missing the point fallacy?

The missing the point fallacy occurs when someone draws a conclusion that is not supported by the premises. The conclusion may be completely unrelated or different from what the premises suggest, thus misinterpreting the argument.

How does the missing the point fallacy appear in the example about crime rates and the death penalty?

In the example, the premise about rising crime rates leads to an inappropriate conclusion—that the death penalty should be reinstated. The premises would more logically suggest other solutions, such as improving community safety or addressing the root causes of crime.

What is a red herring fallacy?

A red herring fallacy occurs when someone distracts from the original argument by introducing an irrelevant issue. The person shifts the focus to a tangential or unrelated topic to divert attention away from the actual issue being discussed.

How does the red herring fallacy manifest in the example about pesticides and health benefits of vegetables?

In the transcript, the speaker distracts from the original issue of pesticides in fruits and vegetables by talking about the health benefits of carrots, broccoli, and oranges. This shift avoids addressing the real issue of pesticide removal.

What makes the fallacy of relevance different from other types of fallacies?

The fallacy of relevance differs because it involves arguments where the premises are not logically connected to the conclusion, making the reasoning irrelevant. Other fallacies, such as formal fallacies, may involve incorrect logical structure, while relevance fallacies are about psychological manipulation or distraction.

How can recognizing fallacies of relevance help in critical thinking?

Recognizing fallacies of relevance helps in critical thinking by ensuring that arguments are logically sound and that conclusions are supported by valid and relevant premises. It allows individuals to identify manipulative or misleading reasoning that might otherwise appear convincing.