Virgil: Online Advice on Essay Writing
Rhetorical FallaciesRhetorical fallacies, or fallacies of argument, don’t allow for the open, two-way exchange of ideas upon which meaningful conversations depend. Instead, they distract the reader with various appeals instead of using sound reasoning. They can be divided into three categories:
Keep in mind that rhetorical fallacies often overlap. EMOTIONAL FALLACIESSentimental Appeals use emotion to distract the audience from the facts. Red Herrings use misleading or unrelated evidence to support a conclusion. Scare Tactics try to frighten people into agreeing with the arguer by threatening them or predicting unrealistically dire consequences. Bandwagon Appeals encourage an audience to agree with the writer because everyone else is doing so. Slippery Slope arguments suggest that one thing will lead to another, oftentimes with disastrous results. Either/Or Choices reduce complicated issues to only two possible courses of action. False Need arguments create an unnecessary desire for things. ETHICAL FALLACIESFalse Authority asks audiences to agree with the assertion of a writer based simply on his or her character or the authority of another person or institution who may not be fully qualified to offer that assertion. Using Authority Instead of Evidence occurs when someone offers personal authority as proof. Guilt by Association calls someone’s character into question by examining the character of that person’s associates. Dogmatism shuts down discussion by asserting that the writer’s beliefs are the only acceptable ones. Moral Equivalence compares minor problems with much more serious crimes (or vice versa). Ad Hominem arguments attack a person’s character rather than that person’s reasoning. Strawperson arguments set up and often dismantle easily refutable arguments in order to misrepresent an opponent’s argument in order to defeat him or her LOGICAL FALLACIESA Hasty Generalization draws conclusions from scanty evidence. Faulty Causality (or Post Hoc) arguments confuse chronology with causation: one event can occur after another without being caused by it. A Non Sequitur (Latin for “It doesn’t follow”) is a statement that does not logically relate to what comes before it. An important logical step may be missing in such a claim. An Equivocation is a half-truth, or a statement that is partially correct but that purposefully obscures the entire truth. Begging the Question occurs when a writer simply restates the claim in a different way; such an argument is circular. A Faulty Analogy is an inaccurate, inappropriate, or misleading comparison between two things. Stacked Evidence represents only one side of the issue, thus distorting the issue. Further Resources: Lunsford, Andrea A. and John Ruszkiewicz. Everything’s an Argument. 3rd ed. New York: Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2004.
|