General logical fallacies

[intricatic]

Link

What's everyone's favorite logical fallacy?

Mine is Post hoc, ergo propter hoc.

"After this, therefore because of this"

A dubious example: Post hoc, ergo propter hoc is the most important fallacy you will ever learn about, simply because it's name is so much fun to say.

[intricatic]

Hmm, thinking about it now, since we're in an election season, it may have been wise to start this thread in the Politics section - then we could analyze all of the logical fallacies the politicians are using in their campaigns!

Obama: "I can no more disown [Jeremiah Wright] than I can my white grandmother – a woman who helped raise me, a woman who sacrificed again and again for me, a woman who loves me as much as she loves anything in this world, but a woman who once confessed her fear of black men who passed by her on the street, and who on more than one occasion has uttered racial or ethnic stereotypes that made me cringe." -- what logical fallacy is this?

[mlqurgw]

Originally Posted by intricatic

Hmm, thinking about it now, since we're in an election season, it may have been wise to start this thread in the Politics section - then we could analyze all of the logical fallacies the politicians are using in their campaigns!

Obama: "I can no more disown [Jeremiah Wright] than I can my white grandmother ? a woman who helped raise me, a woman who sacrificed again and again for me, a woman who loves me as much as she loves anything in this world, but a woman who once confessed her fear of black men who passed by her on the street, and who on more than one occasion has uttered racial or ethnic stereotypes that made me cringe." -- what logical fallacy is this?

Though I am not well versed in logic I will give it a try. It seems to me to be a diversionary appeal to emotion. It is also avoiding the issue by comparing apples to oranges, unless he intends for us to think his grandmother is a racist, which I seriously doubt. Would that be the fallacy of the excluded middle? At first glance there may seem to be a connection between the two but there actually isn't.

[mlqurgw]

Oh Yeah I almost forgot; politcal speech is by necessity illogical. It is only intended to convince not to arrive at truth.

[intricatic]

Originally Posted by mlqurgw

Though I am not well versed in logic I will give it a try. It seems to me to be a diversionary appeal to emotion. It is also avoiding the issue by comparing apples to oranges, unless he intends for us to think his grandmother is a racist, which I seriously doubt. Would that be the fallacy of the excluded middle? At first glance there may seem to be a connection between the two but there actually isn't.

Best fallacy would probably be the Red Herring: Ignoratio Elenchi ("ignorance of refutation", Latin)

The name of this fallacy comes from the sport of fox hunting in which a dried, smoked herring, which is red in color, is dragged across the trail of the fox to throw the hounds off the scent. Thus, a "red herring" argument is one which distracts the audience from the issue in question through the introduction of some irrelevancy. This frequently occurs during debates when there is an at least implicit topic, yet it is easy to lose track of it. By extension, it applies to any argument in which the premisses are logically irrelevant to the conclusion.

Because the argument wasn't presented that he should disown his mother, the premise of his argument was diversionary - he was effectively trying to alter the premise of the original argument by moving to an irrelevant topic.

[intricatic]

Originally Posted by mlqurgw

Oh Yeah I almost forgot; politcal speech is by necessity illogical. It is only intended to convince not to arrive at truth.

Indeed, which is why the blatant fallacies they express can be so amusing to scrutinize!

[DMcKay]

Originally Posted by intricatic

Hmm, thinking about it now, since we're in an election season, it may have been wise to start this thread in the Politics section - then we could analyze all of the logical fallacies the politicians are using in their campaigns!

Obama: "I can no more disown [Jeremiah Wright] than I can my white grandmother ? a woman who helped raise me, a woman who sacrificed again and again for me, a woman who loves me as much as she loves anything in this world, but a woman who once confessed her fear of black men who passed by her on the street, and who on more than one occasion has uttered racial or ethnic stereotypes that made me cringe." -- what logical fallacy is this?

Ian,

Come on, you know we only have so much space on the server.

[intricatic]

Originally Posted by DMcKay

Ian,

Come on, you know we only have so much space on the server.

That's true - the thought of buying a dedicated host with some 80GB of space is unnerving.

[mlqurgw]

Originally Posted by intricatic

Best fallacy would probably be the Red Herring: Ignoratio Elenchi ("ignorance of refutation", Latin)




Because the argument wasn't presented that he should disown his mother, the premise of his argument was diversionary - he was effectively trying to alter the premise of the original argument by moving to an irrelevant topic.

I considered that it might be a red herring but I still think it falls under the excluded middle. Let me see if I can elaborate. The assumed premise is that Wright says racist things. The second is that his grandmother says racist things.
The third is that his grandmother isn't a racist because she helped raise him, sacrificed for him and loved him. Therefore Wright cannot be a racist. There is no necessary connection that arrives at the conclusion.

[DMcKay]

Originally Posted by intricatic

That's true - the thought of buying a dedicated host with some 80GB of space is unnerving.

Ian,

If it will help I have a zippy little SAMSUNG SV0813H 80 Gig ATA drive that I am about to pull out of my Tower and replace with a 120 Gig. If it will help send me an address to send it to.

Don M