AP Lang - Unit 4 (Rhetorical Fallacies)

Rhetorical Fallacy

- Faulty reasoning leading to a conclusion the advertiser, author, or speaker wants you to make.

- Often in ads, statements by politicians, appeals from charities, arguments from people in your life.

- Uses (or rather, mis-uses) language to trick you into accepting the author’s conclusion.

Spotting and Avoiding Rhetorical Fallacies

- Seems to support a conclusion that author wants reader to accept, but it doesn’t really lead to that conclusion.

- Identify rhetorical fallacies by following this process: identify the conclusion, identify the evidence, examine the evidence.

Ad Populum or “Bandwagon”

Evidence focuses on the person who supports a conclusion, not on the merits of the conclusion itself.

Ad Populum/Bandwagon Examples

- “A certain political candidate is ahead in the polls. Since most people are going to vote for him, you should too. Otherwise you’ll just be wasting your vote.”

- An ad displaying a happy crowd on the beach. “All of these people are having a great vacation at this resort; you should go there, and you’ll have fun too.”

Argument from Authority

Focuses solely on the credentials/fame of the person recommending the product, without saying anything about the product itself.

Argument from Authority Example

“Timotheé Chalamet always uses this brand of hair gel.”

—> Is he being paid by the manufacturers to endorse the product, or does it have attributes that really make it superior?

Ad Hominem

Turns to the other side of the coin and points out negative characteristics of the person who promotes an idea or action.

Ad Hominem Example

"Joe's political views are meaningless: he's an alcoholic."

Dogmatism

The conclusion must be correct because the author or speaker says it is and she can’t possibly be wrong.

Dogmatism Example

“She is the CEO of the most profitable company on the planet. She wouldn’t have risen to that position if she were ever wrong.”

—> No other reasons presented to support conclusion, and no opposing viewpoints are considered.

Equivocation

- Leaves out facts that someone would need to make a thorough assessment of the conclusion.

- Often relies on ambiguous definition of words.

Equivocation Example

- “For $50, your home insurer may cover $100,000 in flood damage.”

—> In fine print, insurer regards "water damage" to be sewer backup damage. Overland flooding and roof ice jams are excluded.

Sentimental Appeals

- Charities often use this tactic when they ask for donations.

- Omits sensible justifications for why the charity deserves your support.

Sentimental Appeals Example

- Starving children to evoke emotions rather than intellect.

—> What has the charity done recently to fix the problem? How much $$ are they actually contributing towards the issue?

Slippery Slope

- When someone claims that a position or decision will lead to a series of unintended/outlandish negative consequences.

- Often used as a deflection to avoid discussing the merits of a position.

Slippery Slope Example

“If you eat at a fast-food takeout once, pretty soon you’ll never want to eat healthy, nourishing home-cooked meals again.”

Scare Tactics

Speaker/author attempts to frighten you into agreeing with them.

Scare Tactics Example

“If you don’t commit to a two-year contract, your monthly rate won’t be protected and prices are going to go through the roof in the next couple of years.”

—> On what evidence do they make that prediction?

Red Herring

Focuses attention on an insignificant or irrelevant factor instead of addressing the key issues of an opposing argument.

Red Herring Example

- “You should avoid eating green vegetables (the conclusion) because of the risk of salmonella contamination (the red herring).”

—> Avoids the main points of the opposing argument in favor of green vegetables (such as nutritional content and health benefits).

Straw Man

Writer creates a straw man—something that’s easy to knock down and tear apart—as the opposing viewpoint.

Straw Man Example

- Mayor wants taxpayers to pay for a new bridge.

- She claims opponents of this investment don't think the new bridge is required because subdivision residents can drive downtown, across the existing bridge, and back up the other side of the river to the new neighborhood in an additional half hour.

—> If you live, work, or shop in the new subdivision, it's easy to argue for a new bridge.

Faulty Analogy

One thing is compared with a second thing, but comparison is exaggerated, misleading, or unreasonable.

Faulty Analogy Example

- “Hiking on that trail is like descending into a dungeon of horrors from which you might never return.”

—> Perhaps it’s just a challenging trail that leads through thick woods. But not many people would try it after hearing the speaker’s comparison.

Faulty Causality/Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc

Assumes that because one event happened shortly before another, the first event must have caused the second.

Faulty Causality/Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc Example

- “She wore her old Brand X runners instead of her new Brand Y runners, therefore she lost the race.”

—> Maybe she lost because she didn’t train properly.

Reverse Causation

Causal arguments often faulty because the reverse causation is equally plausible.

Reverse Causation Example

- “Eating too much chocolate can make you depressed.”

—> Just as likely that depressed people might feel the urge to eat too much chocolate.

—> If author says “A caused B,” ask yourself, “Is it also possible that B caused A?”

Begging the Question

An assumption that’s not proven is used as evidence that the conclusion is correct.

Begging the Question Example

- "High-altitude skiing is such a deadly activity, (the proof) that no one under the age of 18 should be allowed to undertake it" (the conclusion).

—> If writer had provided facts/instances that high-altitude skiing is risky for youth, argument would be valid.

—> But he doesn't; He uses that premise to justify his conclusion.

Circular Argument

Says essentially the same thing in both the conclusion and in the evidence that allegedly supports it.

Circular Argument Example

- “Sally cares about others (the conclusion) since she's always willing to help” (the evidence).

—> Someone who helps others cares for them. Both the conclusion and the evidence describe the same idea.

Missing the Point

Author offers evidence that supports a conclusion but it’s not the same conclusion the author reaches.

Missing the Point Example

“This man on trial stands accused of murder, and the penalty is death! Murder is the most heinous of crimes, which deserves to be met with an eye for an eye!”

—> In this trial, point is not to determine whether the death penalty is justified under criminal law. Rather, the point is, did this man do it?

Non Sequitur

- Latin term for “it doesn’t follow.”

- Conclusion is not logically related to the evidence that preceded it.

Non Sequitur Example

“Investing in cryptocurrencies is a risk, but everything in life involves a risk. Every time you drive a car, you are taking a risk. If you’re willing to drive a car, you should be willing to invest in cryptocurrencies.”

False Dichotomy

Assumes a black-and-white world in which there is no middle ground/no other alternative.

False Dichotomy Example

- “If we don’t launch a preemptive attack and destroy the enemy first, they will destroy us.”

—> No consideration given to other possibilities, such as a diplomatic solution.

Hasty Generalization

Author/speaker assumes that a limited experience foreshadows the entire experience.

Hasty Generalization Example

“I could tell from the first few minutes that the movie was going to be unbearably boring, so I left rather than waste any more of my time.”

Non-testable Hypothesis

Anything that hasn’t been proven false is assumed to be true.

Non-testable Hypothesis Example

- An environmental group claims that average temperatures across entire North American continent would fall by 1° Celsius if we switched completely to renewable energy.

—> We’ve never abandoned fossil fuels entirely, so it’s impossible to prove their claim is false; The argument assumes it must be true.