thank you for arguing chapter 14-18

4 questions to determine if there is fallacy in an argument

1. does the proof hold up?

2. am I given the right # of choices?

3. does the proof lead to the conclusion?

4. who cares?

3 identifiers associated with logical fallacies

1. bad proof

2. wrong # of choices

3. disconnect between proof and conclusion

bad proof

consists of 3 sins: false comparison (lumping examples into the wrong categories), bad example, and ignorance as proof (asserting that the lack of examples proves something)

false comparison

lumping examples into the wrong categories

ignorance as proof

asserting that the lack of examples proves something

wrong number of choices

covers one essential sin, the false choice

false choice

offering just 2 choices when more are actually available, or merging 2 or 3 issues into one

Disconnect between proof and conclusion

Results in the tautology (in

which the proof and the conclusion are identical), the red herring (a

sneaky distraction), or the wrong ending (in which the proof fails to lead to

the conclusion).

tautology

proof and conclusion are identical, unnecessary repetition

reductio ad absurdum

Reducing an argument to absurdity

many questions

two or more issues get merged into one, so that a conclusion proves another conclusion

complex cause

assumes there is a single, simple cause of an outcome when in reality it may have been caused by a # of causes (more than one cause is to blame, but only one gets the rap)

false dilemma

A fallacy of oversimplification that offers a limited number of options (usually two) when in fact more options are available.

the red herring

switches issues in mid argument to throw the audience off the scent

straw man

switches topics to one that's easier to fight

Slippery Slope

A fallacy that assumes that taking a first step will lead to subsequent steps that cannot be prevented

7 logical sins

false comparison

bad example

ignorance as proof

tautology

false choice

red herring

wrong ending

fallacy of power

because the guy in charge wants it, it must be good

Appeal to Popularity

legitimizes your choice by claiming that others have chosen it

fallacy of antecedent

if it never happened before it will never happen, or it happened once so it will happen again

False Analogy

When two cases are not sufficiently parallel to lead readers to accept a claim of connection between them.

misinterpreting the evidence

The examples don't support the conclusion

Hasty Generalization

reaching a conclusion without adequate supporting evidence

Fallacy of Ignorance

what we cannot prove, cannot exist

Chanticleer fallacy

assumes that if one thing follows another, the first thing caused the second one

purpose of argument

be persuasive not "correct"

8 rhetorical out-of-bounds

1. switching tenses-away from the future

2. inflexible insistence on the rules-using the voice of god, sticking to your guns, refusing to hear the other side

3. humiliation-an argument that sets out only to debase someone, not to make a choice

4. innuendo

5. threats

6. nasty language or signs

7. utter stupidity

8. truthiness-the refusal to believe anything that fails to match your opinion

wrong tense

straying from future tense

right way

closely related to avoiding the future, because it sticks to values-covering Right and Wrong, Who's In and Who's Out-instead of the main topic of deliberative argument-the advantageous

innuendo

(n.) a hint, indirect suggestion, or reference (often in a derogatory sense)

utter stupidity

most common stupidity in argument, aside from the gratuitous insult, in the arguer's failure to recognize his own logical fallacies

fouls of argument

1. foul of the wrong tense

2. foul of the right way

3. foul of the innuendo

4. foul of the threat

5. foul of the utter stupidity

basic principles of ethos

disinterest

virtue

practical wisdom

how see if ethos is accurate

look for disconnects

virtue according to aristotle

a state of character concerned with choice lying in a mean

a state of character

Rhetorical virtue that exists only during the argument itself and it adapts to the audience's expectations

concerned with choice

Virtue comes out of the choices the persuader makes.

lying in a mean

To Aristotle, the sweet spot of every question lies in the middle between extremes. Determine the middle of the road in any question. If the persuaders use extreme terms --- "radical," "cruel", "abusive" --- then beware of their advice. Extremists usually describe the middle course as extreme.

"there's virtue in moderation"

You get virtue by choosing the moderate choice between two extremes in the audiences opinion

tools for telling how much you should trust someone's sincerity and trustworthiness

1. apply the needs test (disinterest): are the persuader's needs your needs? whose needs is the person meeting?

2. check the extremes (virtue): how does he describe the opposing argument? how close is the middle-of-the-road to yours?

Practical Wisdom (Phronesis)

Craft; audience must share you ideas or beliefs on a subject as well as believe that you are capable of making the correct decision in that moment

2 things to see if something is practical wisdom

1. first you want to hear "that depends"

2. then you want to hear a tale of comparable experience

most important trait of practical wisdom

??

6 steps to evaluating ethos

??

aggressive interest

respond to a political bully by feigning sympathetic curiosity while continuously asking for definitions, details, and sources (best tool to use against a political bully)

tools for bullies

audience targeting

ironic love

virtue pose

aggressive interest

virtue pose

show yourself to be the better person. do this by showing little negative emotion. invite a conversation and seem slightly disappointed in the bully when he refuses

ironic love

kind of irony works best when your audience can see through it

audience targeting

when you're under attack, search out your persuadable audience