Have you ever lost an argument that you thought you should’ve won?
Chances are that most of the people reading this have answered ‘yes’ to that question. Sometimes, it is in fact a deserved loss. But other times it can be your opponent just using a logical fallacy.
A logical fallacy is defined as ‘the use of invalid or otherwise faulty reasoning, or “wrong moves” in the construction of an argument.’ According to Wikipedia, a logical fallacy is something that is a facade that is built on an invalid basis of argument. In this article, we are going to explain some of the most common logical fallacies so you can call out anyone who uses them, potentially winning the argument that way.
The ‘Straw Man Fallacy‘, a classic logical fallacy that is used by people more often than not. In fact, some people do not even know it’s a logical fallacy! This fallacy is named after a pitiful, colorless strawman or scarecrow. “Strawman” represents the fallacy as the fallacy is attacking a weak strawman that is easily defeated, the strawman was never the original argument in the first place: This is why people commonly say “you are attacking a straw man” during an argument. This form of informal fallacy often extremities or goes after a different subject than the one proposed, this is a misinterpretation, and misexplanation of the opposition’s argument; this can make the fallacious argument look more appealing and thereby stronger than it actually is. Here is an example for a further understanding of the Straw Man fallacy:
Person 1: “I like to eat meat and dairy products”
Person 2: “So, you like to torture animals, enclose them in unethical places for intensive farming, and don’t want animals to have rights?”
In the example above, it is clear that the first person only referred to liking the products created by animals, the first person never claimed to be in support of the things listed by person 2, such as torturing animals. Person 2 created a misdirection and essentially extremities the statement and or argument of person 1, this is the straw man fallacy.
The ‘Tu quoque’ is a logical fallacy that is very often used. This informal fallacy tries to falsify the opponents’ argument by attacking the opposition’s personal behavior as being contradictory, rather than the argument itself; claiming hypocrisy. This is a type of ‘Ad Hominem Fallacy.’ Here is an example to further understand the fallacy:
Person 1: “You should not fight with others”
Person 2: “Why should I listen to you? Didn’t you fight with an old friend last year?”
Person 2 is discrediting Person 1’s argument by pointing out that they have fought with their old friend. In this example, whether or not Person 1 fought with someone doesn’t matter as the argument is still valid. This is a fallacy because the discrediting of the argument is solely based on the actions of Person 1 instead of what the argument actually entails.
The ‘Slippery Slope Argument’ is a very extreme representation of an unknown set of results or future consequences. In other words, the slippery slope fallacy explains that certain actions will cause a chain of future results that are usually unfavorable. This is often used by people to try and get what they want from someone or convince someone to do something.
Mom: “Don’t stay up late, if you do stay up late:
You’re going to affect your health, if you get ill you won’t be able to attend school to the fullest extent, if you aren’t able to attend school you won’t be able to get into a university, if you don’t get into a university you will be poor and homeless, so you should not stay up late.”
In this example, the Mom is assuming improbable future events based on events that lead to other undesirable events. It’s like the Chaos effect, where one small thing leads to bigger things, this is not valid as in this situation staying up one night will not make or break the child’s future.
The ‘False Dilemma’ is a fallacy that represents a limited course of actions when that is simply not true. This fallacy is usually used by politicians or people in power to influence and manipulate the public into supporting their causes that may be opposed by others. In fact, most “Would you rather” questions are false dilemmas (note: We are referring to using would you rather in an argument of something, not as in a game format).
Sometimes this fallacy can be helpful, such as when there is an abundance of possible choices and options, for example, in the movies. You and your friends may vote on two specific movies instead of the entire collection of movies available; this helps choose quicker and is helpful in narrowing down the possibilities. An example of a false dilemma would be “America, love it or leave it.”
The ‘Sunk Cost’ fallacy is a very particular kind of fallacy, it is not often used when trying to degrade your opposition’s argument, but in fact, it is when choosing what to do. When describing the Sunk Cost Fallacy, it is important to note what “Sunk Cost” actually refers to. The sunk cost in economic and finance is a cost that is already used and cannot be regained. This includes but is not limited to: Loss of reputation, labor costs, advertising, etc. The moment where this becomes a fallacy is when something is done solely because of the effort invested, despite it being impractical, such as the costs exceeding the benefits. This can be anything from finishing a book that you don’t like solely because you already read it halfway through or something as extreme as spending government resources on something that is not useful just for the sole purpose that resources have already been invested into it.
For example, imagine that a government was creating a desalination project and were around 75% (the 75% is the sunk cost) of the way to completion. Suddenly, they find a huge supply of groundwater and so the desalination plants will become obsolete. If the government chooses to continue with the desalination plants just because they already invested 75%, it becomes a Sunk Cost Fallacy by the government as there is no longer a need for it since there was a reservoir of groundwater that can be used, the cost is going to outweigh the benefits of having it.
We hope you learned something about some logical fallacies that may become useful for you in the future. If you’d like to learn more about logical fallacies there are many more such as Ad Hominem, Red Herring, Appeal to [ignorance, power, pity, etc.], Fallacy of Presentism, and much more.
