What are fallacies? Fallacies are ,mistakes, made in an argument. There are different types of fallacies, each of which requires its own approach. Would you also like to know how to recognize a fallacy and how to refute it? Then read this article about recognizing and refuting fallacies now!
Types of fallacies
There are a lot of different types of fallacies. Different types of fallacies each require their own approach to turn the discussion or debate in your favor. First, an overview of the different types of fallacies. Each fallacy will then be discussed in detail.
Types of fallacies
- Appeal to authority
- Appeal to tradition
- Personal attack
- Circular reasoning
- Shifting the burden of proof
- Putting words in the other person’s mouth
- You too argument
- Incorrect causation
- Wrong comparison
- Hasty generalization
- Preventing a dissenting opinion
- ,Stick behind the door,
Appeal to authority
When appealing to authority, someone of prestige is mentioned who shares an opinion with the person speaking. What one can also encounter as an argument from authority:
- That ,it, is evident from a scientific study
- That ,it, has been in the media (newspaper, TV, radio, internet, etc.)
- That the majority also wants ,it, that way
- That ,it, is in a holy book
Example: The Bible says that X is forbidden, so we must ban X.
It is important to ask yourself the following with this form of argument:
- Is the person/book/medium, etc. actually an authority in his or her field?
- Does the authority have its own interests in what he/she/it says?
If there is no authority within his or her field, then there is a fallacy. Does the authority itself have an interest in what is said? In that case there is also a fallacy.
Appeal to tradition
The appeal to tradition is something that is often used by the conservative branch of politics. The appeal to tradition is used relatively often because many people do not like change. Criticism of this can best be aimed at the silent argument.
Example: Of course, students must continue to work with pen and paper, this has always been the case.
Personal attack
The personal attack is one of the vilest fallacies there is, but it is also the easiest to refute if you have a strong position. In a personal attack, the man is directly targeted without even a single substantive argument being given. Personal attacks are almost always aimed at one of the following:
- Someone’s past
- Someone’s appearance
- One’s religion
- One’s political preference
- Someone’s personal environment
Example: You’re not right because you’re ugly.
Circular reasoning
In circular reasoning, the argument and the opinion are substantively the same, the difference is that they are formulated differently. Circular reasoning can be very difficult to recognize, especially when the opinion and argument are not extremely close to each other. When confronted with a circular argument, it is wise to point out to your opponent that the position and the argument are the same.
Example: Useful is the same as having a lot of use
Shifting the burden of proof
Shifting the burden of proof is often used as a last resort. When the burden of proof shifts, an opinion is still given, but no argument. The opponent who disagrees should come up with an argument. This is not a correct way to argue. When you are confronted with a shift in the burden of proof, you can criticize that the person who expresses an opinion must also come up with the arguments himself.
Example: I don’t have to give a reason for this, just give me a reason why I should do that.
Putting words in the other person’s mouth
Anyone who puts words into someone else’s mouth twists the opponent’s statement into another statement. This is a statement that the other person has not made, but it is subsequently attacked. This is not correct, so the simplest criticism of this is: ,I didn’t say that., It is important not to defend statements that you have not made.
False dilemma
A special case of this fallacy is the ,false dilemma,. The false dilemma pretends that there are only two options. Option A and option B. If you disagree with option A, then you automatically agree with option B.
Example: If you do not eat animals, you think that others should not eat them either.
You too argument
With the ,you too argument, you will see that a different case is presented against it. In this way, the opponent wants to make it seem as if the two cases cancel each other out. This is of course not the case, and therefore incorrect. Even if someone comes forward with a counter-accusation, it does not alter the case under discussion.
Example: ,Yes, I know I was late today, but you are late sometimes too!,
Incorrect causation
An incorrect causal relationship involves a link between two things that may be true, but between which there is no causal relationship. For example, you can also argue in this way that it gets dark in the evening because the moon will shine. This is of course not correct. It is important to ask yourself the following about a causal relationship:
- Does this cause indeed lead to the mentioned effect?
- Isn’t the effect also caused by something else?
Wrong comparison
In the wrong comparison, two different things are presented as one and the same thing. It is important to pay close attention to this. The two things may seem similar, but they are always different. When faced with an incorrect comparison, the best criticism is to point out to the opponent that the comparison made is incorrect. The reason for this is that there are also major differences.
Example: The Netherlands is largely below sea level. Almost all other countries do not.
Hasty generalization
You also see hasty generalization a lot in politics. With a hasty generalization, a conclusion is drawn about a large group based on only one or a few observations. If you want to criticize this, the best way to do so is to note that only a small number of observations have taken place.
Example: Foreigners always argue, I had an argument with my foreign neighbor.
Preventing a dissenting opinion
When a dissenting opinion occurs, arguments are lacking. The opinion is then formulated in such a way that the listener is deprived of the courage to object to it. The opponent can do this in different ways. The speaker can also flatter the listener and thus try to ward off a counterattack. Examples of this are:
- I don’t need to tell an intelligent boy like you that…
- Every decent Dutch person knows that…
- Everyone knows that…
- It’s just a fact that…
- No one doubts that…
- Of course it is true that…
Always ask yourself whether it is really the case that everyone knows something, and that something is really a fact. Be critical!
,Stick behind the door,
The last and perhaps vaguest fallacy is the ,stick behind the door,. The opinion is not supported by an argument, but by pointing out that the dire consequences for the listener are ,not worth it,. The listener therefore actually has no choice but to accept the opinion. Don’t be fooled by these kinds of tricks!
read more
- Mixed forms of text types
- Explanation or reflection?