Animal Farm Extras (focuses, satire, and fallacies)

tools of satire

irony sarcasm, exaggeration (burlesque), parody, caricature, absurdity, and reversal are all ?

horation

this type of satire is light hearted, gentle, and playful, its goal is to make fun of human foolishness or weakness with a smile. (ex. SNL)

Juvenalian

this type of satire is harsh, biting, and denounces human vice and corruption with scorn. It aims to provoke a more serious response from the audience. Goal is to make the audience angry about an issue (ex. A modest proposal)

Menippean

this type of satire is a blend of genres and often targets mental attitudes and beliefs, using a more complex and philosophical approach. It seeks to examine the absurdity in human behavior through wit and humor. varied, eccentric, focused on mental attitudes. Goal is to target a specific mindset. (ex. alice in wonderland)

A Fairy Story

Orwell’s original name for Animal Farm is ?

political satire

what is the story’s function ? (hint some type of satire)

publishing difficulties

these things led to ?

1. european admiration of socialism

2. hesistancy to insult the soviets

3. confliction with socialism, capitalism, and facism

Criticizes

These are all things that orwell ___ in Animal Farm?

1. revolution

2. equality

3. power

4. propaganda

5. political hypocrisy

6. the manipulation of truth and ideals

literally

This a way of reading animal farm, a story of animals rebelling against humans

Historically

This is a way of reading animal farm, an allegory connected to the russian revolution and the soviet union

Universally

This is a way of reading animal farm, a story about power, propaganda, fear, and inequality in society

logos

Appeal to logic

ethos

appeal to credibility

pathos

appeal to emotion

whatever goes upon two legs is an enemy

commandment 1 is ?

whatever goes upon four legs or has wings is a friend

commandment 2 is ?

no animal shall wear clothes

commandment 3 is?

no animal shall sleep in a bed

commandment 4 is ?

no animal shall drink alcohol

commandment 5 is ?

no animal shall kill any other animal

commandment 6 is?

all animals are equal

commandment 7 is ?

hasty generalization

a broad claim rests on two or unrepresentative examples. Enough evidence?

post hoc ergo propter hoc

assumes a causes b because b happened after a (sequence or cause)?

slippery slope

predicts an extreme chain of consequences without adequately supporting the link (fail test —> homeless)

false dichotomy

offers only 2 choices when other reasonable options are missing

petito principii

assumes the conclusion in the reasons offered to prove it (circular)?

non sequitur

conclusion is not properly supported by stated reasons

ad hominem

attack on speaker rather than reasoning to dismiss an argument

genetic fallacy

judges an idea based on its origin

ad verecundiam

treats an unqualified or inappropirate authority as decisive proof

ad populum

treats widespread agreement as proof of a claim

ad antiquitatem

treat’s the age of a practice as a sufficient reason to keep it

ipse dixit

expects a claim to be accepted simply because it is asserted

ad passiones

feelings replace reason

Ad terrorem

using fear as inadequate support for a agreement

ad odium

hostility against a group or person as a reason to agree

ad invidiam

resentment of other’s advantages as proof

ad blanditas

praise of audience for support (flattery)

appeal to pride

pressures agreement through intelligence, honor, superiority, or group identity.

ad ridiculum

mocks a position rather than finding its weaknesses

ad fastudium

revulsion as proof of wrong claim

ad misericordiam

sympathy as a substitute to evidence

red herring

introduces an irrelevant issues to distract from an original question

straw man

distorts a position to make it easier to attack (is that their actual claim?)

ignoratio elenchi

supports a different conclusion than the issue at hand

whataboutism

deflects with another wrong (opponents misdeeds)

motte and bailey

retreats to a safer claim and acts as if defending it also defends the original claim.

reductio ad absurdum

a valid method of rhetoric; temporarily assumes a claim proves it leads to a contradiction (proof by contradiction 🙂 )