Master List of Logical Fallacies Falschmeldungen sind falsche oder trügerische Argumente, Argumente, die nichts beweisen. Irrtümer scheinen oft oberflächlich zu klingen, und viel zu oft behalten sie immense Überzeugungskraft, selbst wenn sie deutlich als falsch ausgesetzt sind. Täuschungen sind nicht immer bewusst, aber ein guter Gelehrter Zweck ist immer zu identifizieren und zu entlarven Trugschlüsse in Argumenten. Beachten Sie, dass viele dieser Definitionen sich überschneiden, aber das Ziel hier ist, zeitgenössische und klassische Irrtümer zu identifizieren, wie sie im heutigen Diskurs verwendet werden. Es wurden Anstrengungen unternommen, um bloße Wortspiele zu vermeiden (z. B. die Fallacists Fallacy, quot oder das berühmte "Crocodiles Paradoxquot" der klassischen Zeit) oder das sogenannte quotfallaciesquot von rein formaler, symbolischer oder geschäftlicher und finanzieller Logik. Kein Anspruch auf quotacademic rigorquot in dieser Auflistung gemacht. Das A-Priori-Argument (auch Rationalisierungs-Proof-Texting): Ein korruptes Argument aus Logos, beginnend mit einem gegebenen, vorgegebenen Glauben, Dogma, Doktrin, Schriftsvers, quotfactquot oder Schlussfolgerung und dann nach einem vernünftigen oder vernünftig klingenden Argument suchen Zu rationalisieren, zu verteidigen oder zu rechtfertigen. Bestimmte Ideologen und religiöse Fundamentalisten sind stolz, diesen Irrtum als ihre primäre Methode der Quotierung zu verwenden, und einige sind sogar ehrlich genug, um das zu sagen. Das Gegenteil von diesem Irrtum ist das Tabu. Siehe auch quotTwo Truths. quot Maßnahmen haben Konsequenzen: Der zeitgenössische Irrtum einer Person an der Macht fälschlich beschreibt eine verhängte Strafe oder Strafe als eine Konsequenz quot einer negativen negativen Tat. Z. B. Die Folgen Ihres Fehlverhaltens könnten Aussetzung oder Vertreibung sein. Ein korruptes Argument aus dem Ethos, das sich selbst oder den Regeln oder Gesetzen ein Ethos der kosmischen Unvermeidbarkeit, das Ethos Gottes, des Schicksals, des Schicksals oder der Wirklichkeit selbst, verhaftet. Das Einfrieren zum Tode ist eine natürliche Konsequenz, wenn es darum geht, nackt in unterirdischem Wetter zu gehen, aber ins Gefängnis zu gehen, ist ein Bestrafter für Bankraub, nicht eine natürliche, unvermeidliche oder unvermeidliche Konsequenz. Nicht zu verwechseln mit dem Argument aus Konsequenzen, was ganz anders ist. Ein entgegengesetzter Irrtum ist der Moral Licensing. Das Ad-Hominem-Argument (auch "Persönlicher Angriff" genannt): Der Irrtum des Versuches, ein Argument zu widerlegen, indem man die Gegensätze persönlicher Charakter oder Reputation unter Verwendung eines verdorbenen negativen Arguments aus dem Ethos angreift. Z. B. Es ist so böse, dass Sie nicht glauben, was er sagt. quot Siehe auch quotGuilt von Association. quot Das Gegenteil von diesem ist die quotStar Powerquot Irrtum. Eine weitere Vorderseite von Ad Hominem ist die Token Endorsement Fallacy. Wo in den Worten des Gelehrten Lara Bhasin "Einzelnes A Antisemitismus angeklagt worden ist, aber Individuelles B ist Jüdisch und sagt, daß Individuelles A nicht antisemitisch ist, und die Implikation ist natürlich, daß wir Individuum B glauben können, weil Sein Jüdisch, hat er besondere Kenntnisse des Antisemitismus. Oder wird ein Präsidentschaftskandidat der Anti-Muslim Bigotterie beschuldigt, aber jemand findet ein Zeugnis von einem Muslim, der für den Kandidaten gestimmt haben, und dies wird trabte als Beweis gegen den Kandidaten bigotry. quot Der gleiche Irrtum zu einer Sportmannschaft gelten würde benannt Nach einer marginalisierten ethnischen Gruppe, die aber die Anerkennung (frei gegeben oder bezahlt) eines Mitglieds, eines traditionellen Führers oder eines Stammesrates dieser marginalisierten Gruppe erhalten hat, so dass der ansonsten anstößige Teamname und - logo zauberhaft zum Quotokayquot und Nonracist wird. Die Affective Fallacy (auch die romantische Fallacy): Ein Irrtum des Pathos, dass diejenigen, Emotionen, drängt oder quotfeelingsquot sind in jedem Fall selbst Validierung, autonom, und vor jeder menschlichen Vorsatz oder Akt des Willens (die eigene oder andere), und sind Also immun gegen Herausforderung oder Kritik. In diesem Irrtum argumentiert man: "Meine Gefühle sind gültig, also haben Sie kein Recht zu kritisieren, was ich sage oder tue, oder wie ich es sage oder tue." Dies ist auch ein Trugschluss der Stauung, verwirrend eine respektvolle und begründete Antwort Oder Widerlegung mit persönlicher Abwertung, Respektlosigkeit, Vorurteilen, Bigotterie, Sexismus, Homophobie oder Feindschaft. Eine grob sexistische Form des Affective Fallacy ist der wohlbekannte grobe Irrtum, den ein Phallus "No conscience" heisst, denn da (vor allem männliche) Sexualität selbstvalidierend und freiwillig kontrollierbar ist, kann man nicht kontrollieren und ist nicht offen Kritik, eine Behauptung eifrig umarmte und erweiterte sich über das männliche Geschlecht in bestimmten Reifizierungen von Derealquot in der heutigen akademischen Theorie. Siehe auch, Spielen auf Emotion. Im Gegensatz zu dieser Irrtum ist die Chosen Emotion Fallacy (Dank Gelehrter Marc Lawson für die Identifizierung dieser Irrtum), in denen man fälschlicherweise behauptet, zuverlässige vorherige freiwillige Kontrolle über die eigenen quotgut levelquot interne affektive Reaktionen. Im Zusammenhang mit diesem letzten ist die alte Irrtum des Angelismus, fälschlicherweise behaupten, dass man in der Lage ist, quotobjectivequot Denken ohne Emotionen, oder behaupten für sich selbst einen Standpunkt der Olympian quotdisinterested Objektivität oder vorgeben, sich vor allem Emotion. Siehe auch Mortification. Alphabet-Suppe: Eine korrupte implizite Irrtum aus Ethos, in dem eine Person unangemessen Akronyme, Abkürzungen, Form Zahlen und arkane Insider-Quottendrequiet in vorrangig zu einem Publikum, dass er / sie Quotspeaks ihre Sprachequot und ist quotiert von themquot und zu schließen, verwirren verwirren Oder beeindrucken Außenseiter. Z. B. quotIts nicht ungewöhnlich für eine K-12 mit ASD beide GT und LDquot quotI hatte mit Zed-S1 und ein paar LU2s obwohl der QR-Nancy war 20 über S9quot zwanzig Minuten DX Q-so auf 15 zu sein Oder quotI hoffe Ill halten auf zu sehen, meine BAQ auf meinem LES bis zum Tag bekomme ich meine DD214.quot Siehe auch, Name Calling. Der Aufruf zum Schliessen. Der zeitgenössische Irrtum, dass ein Argument, Standpunkt, Handlung oder Schlussfolgerung, egal wie fragwürdig muss der Punkt als endgültig oder auch akzeptiert werden verunsichert bleiben, was undenkbar ist, weil diese falsch quotclosure. quot Dieser Irrtum wird verweigert betroffen verdinglicht ein Fachbegriff aus der Gestalt Psychologie (Schließung), während sie sich weigert, die unleugbare Wahrheit zu erkennen, dass einige Punkte in der Tat unbeständig bleiben, vielleicht für immer. Z. B. Die Gesellschaft würde geschützt werden, Verbrechen würde abgeschreckt und Gerechtigkeit gedient, wenn wir Sie zum Leben ohne Bewährung verurteilen, aber wir müssen Sie ausführen, um einige closure. quot zur Verfügung zu stellen. Siehe auch, Argument von Unwissenheit und Argument von Konsequenzen. Das Gegenteil dieser Irrtum ist die Paralyse der Analyse. Der Aufruf zum Himmel. (Auch, Argumentum ad Coelum, Deus Vult, mit Gott Uns, Manifest Destiny, amerikanischen Exzeptionalismus, oder der Sonder Covenant): Eine alte, extrem gefährliche Irrtum (eine verblendete Argument von Ethos) behaupten, dass Gott (oder Geschichte oder eine höhere Macht ) Seinen Standpunkt oder seine Handlungen bestellt, gesalbt, unterstützt oder genehmigt hat, so dass keine weitere Rechtfertigung erforderlich ist und keine ernsthafte Herausforderung besteht. (ZB GOTT befahl mir, meine Kinder zu töten, quot oder quotWir müssen dein Land wegnehmen, da Gott oder manifestes Schicksal, oder das Schicksal, oder der Himmel es uns gegeben hat als unser eigenes.) Eine Privatperson, die ernsthaft diesen Trugschluss behauptet Risiken in einer psychiatrischen Station, aber Gruppen oder Nationen, die es tun, sind viel zu oft ernst genommen. Diese bösartige Irrtum war die Ursache für endlose Blutvergießen über die Geschichte. Siehe auch, Magisches Denken. Gilt auch für getäuschte Negativappelle zum Himmel, z. B. "Sie sagen, dass Hungersnöte und ökologischer Zusammenbruch aufgrund des Klimawandels sind echte Gefahren, aber ich weiß, Gott würde es niemals zulassen, dass happquot Das Gegenteil von dem Appell an den Himmel ist die Jobs Tröster fallacy. Der Appell an die Natur: Der zeitgenössische romantische Irrtum von Ethos (der von NaturMutter), dass, wenn etwas quotnaturalquot es muss gut, gesund und nützlich sein. Z. B. "Unser Kräutertee wird liebevoll aus den feinsten frisch gepflückten natürlichen T. Radicansblättern gebraut. Leute, die es als bloße Poison Ivy entlassen verstehe nicht, dass seine 100 organisch, ohne Zusätze oder künstliche Zutaten Seine Zeit, zu gehen Grün und legte sich zurück in Mütter Ein arms. quot die sich für diesen Irrtum die alte Binsenweisheit vergisst oder fällt beschäftigt, die sich selbst überlassen , Die Natur ist tatsächlich in Zahn und claw. quot zitiert Der Appell an Mitleid. (Auch, quotArgumentum ad Miserecordiamquot): Der Irrtum, ein Publikum zu drängen, für den Underdog zu root, unabhängig von den Problemen zur Hand. Ein klassisches Beispiel ist, Die armen, niedlichen kleinen quietschende Mäuse werden durch gemeine, böse Katzen zehnmal ihre Größe verschluckt. Ein zeitgenössisches Beispiel könnte Amerikas unkritische populäre Unterstützung für die arabische Frühlingsbewegung von 2010-2012 sein, in der die Leute (das Underdogsquot ) Wurden grausame Diktaturen heroisch gestürzt, eine Bewegung, die nach dem Zweiten Weltkrieg rückblickend zu Chaos, Anarchie, Massenleiden, dem Aufstieg des Extremismus und der größten Flüchtlingskrise geführt hat. Ein korruptes Argument von Pathos. Siehe auch, Playing to Emotions. Das Gegenteil von Appell an Pity ist der Appell an Rigor, ein Argument (oft basiert auf Machismo oder auf Manipulation einer Publikum Angst) basiert auf Erbarmungslosigkeit. Z. B. "Ich bin ein echter Mensch, nicht wie die blutenden Herzen, und ich werde hart sein, wenn ich den Namen des Feindes oder des Bogeymans der Stunde ausfülle." In der akademischen Welt gilt diese letztgenannte Täuschung für politisch motivierte oder elitäre Aufforderungen für quotAcademic Rigorquot und gegen Open Admissions , QuotDumbing Downquot und quotGrade Inflation. quot Der Appell an die Tradition. (Auch, Conservative Bias quotDie gute alte Daysquot): Der Irrtum, dass ein Standpunkt, eine Situation oder eine Aktion richtig ist, richtig und richtig, nur weil es quotalwaysquot so gewesen ist, weil die Menschen haben quotalwaysquot so gedacht, oder weil es weiterhin zu dienen Besondere Gruppe sehr gut. Ein verdorbenes Argument von Ethos (das von vergangenen Generationen). Z. B. In Amerika wurden Frauen immer weniger bezahlt, also lass uns nicht mit langjähriger Tradition mithalten. Siehe auch Argument aus Trägheit und Default Bias. Das Gegenteil von diesem ist der Aufruf zur Neuheit (auch "quotPro-Innovation Bias", z. B. "Recycling Bias", quotiert und "The Bad Old Daysquot"), z. B. "Das Argument von Konsequenzen (auch, Outcome Bias): Der große Irrtum der Argumentation, dass etwas nicht wahr sein kann, denn wenn es so wäre, dann muss es besser sein Die Konsequenzen oder das Ergebnis wäre inakzeptabel. (Z. B. quotGlobal Klimawandel kann nicht durch die menschliche Verbrennung von fossilen Brennstoffen verursacht werden, denn wenn es wäre, würde die Umstellung auf nicht-umweltschädliche Energiequellen bankrott amerikanischen Industrie, quotiert oder Doktor, das ist falsch Ich kann nicht haben Endpunkt Krebs, weil wenn ich thatd bedeuten Dass ich nicht leben, um zu sehen, meine Kinder heiratenquot) Nicht zu verwechseln mit Aktionen haben Konsequenzen. Das Argument der Unwissenheit (auch Argumentum ad Ignorantiam): Der Irrtum, dass, da wir nicht wissen (oder nie wissen oder nicht beweisen können), ob ein Anspruch wahr oder falsch ist, muss er falsch sein (oder dass er wahr sein muss). Z. B. Die Wissenschaftler werden niemals in der Lage sein, ihre Theorie positiv zu beweisen, dass sich Menschen von anderen Kreaturen entwickelt haben, denn wir waren dort, um es zu sehen. Das beweist, dass das Sechstage-Schöpfungskonto der Genesis buchstäblich wahr ist wie geschrieben. Dieser Irrtum schließt ein, z. B "Einige Ihrer wichtigsten Beweise fehlen, unvollständig, oder sogar faked Das beweist Im rightquot Dies umfasst in der Regel entweder-Oder Reasonin g: E. g. Der Tierarzt kann keine vernünftige Erklärung dafür finden, warum mein Hund starb. Siehe See Das beweist, dass Sie ihn vergiftet Theres keine andere logische Erklärung Ein verdorbenes Argument aus Logos, und ein Irrtum häufig in der amerikanischen politischen, gerichtlichen und forensischen Argumentation gefunden. Das Argument von Trägheit (auch Stay the Course): Der Irrtum, dass es notwendig ist, auf eine falsche Vorgehensweise fortzusetzen, auch nachdem sie entdeckt wurde, ist es falsch, Weil Veränderung würde bedeuten, dass die Entscheidung (oder ein Führer, oder ein Glaube) falsch war, und alle Anstrengungen, Kosten und Opfer waren für nichts, und das ist undenkbar. Eine Vielzahl des Arguments von den Konsequenzen, E für Anstrengung oder der Appell zur Tradition. Das Argument von Motiven (auch Frage-Motive): Der Irrtum, einen Standpunkt oder ein Argument ungültig zu erklären, nur wegen der bösen, korrupten oder fragwürdigen Motive der einen, die den Anspruch macht. Z. B. Bin Laden wollte uns aus Afghanistan, also müssen wir die Kampfquote halten Auch böse Menschen mit den korruptesten Motiven sagen manchmal die Wahrheit (und auch diejenigen, die die höchsten Motive haben, sind oft falsch oder falsch). Eine Vielzahl der Ad Hominem Argument. Das Gegenstück hierfür ist der Irrtum falscher Rechtfertigung oder Entschuldigung von bösen oder bösartigen Handlungen aufgrund der Täter Reinheit der Motive oder mangelnde Bosheit. (Z. B. sicher, sie kann ihre Kinder blutig geschlagen haben und immer wieder, aber sie war eine gute christliche Frau, die das Beste, was sie konnte mit dem, was sie hatte. Wie könnten Sie dort stehen und beschuldigen sie von Kind Missbrauch) Siehe auch Moral Licensing. Argumentum ad Baculum (quotArgumentum von der Klub. quot Auch, quotArgumentum ad Baculam, quotiertArgument aus Stärke, zitiertMuscular Leadership, quot quotNon-verhandelbar Forderungen, Mobbing, Faschismus, Resolution durch die Kraft der Waffen.): Der Irrtum der Quotientenhilfe oder quotproving Einer ist durch Gewalt, Gewalt oder Drohungen der Gewalt richtig. Z. B. QuotGimmee Ihre Brieftasche oder Kranke klopfen Ihren Kopf offquot oder quotWe haben das perfekte Recht, Ihr Land zu nehmen, da wir die Waffen haben und Sie dont. quot Gilt auch für indirekte Formen der Bedrohung. Z. B. Geben Sie Ihren törichten Stolz, knien Sie nieder und nehmen Sie unsere Religion heute an, wenn Sie nicht in der Hölle für immer und everquot verbrennen möchten Argumentum Anzeige Mysteriam (quotArgument von Mystery. quot): Eine verdunkelte Kammer, Weihrauch, Singen oder Trommeln, das Verbeugen und das Knien, speziell Roben oder Kopfbedeckung, heilige Rituale und Stimmen, die heilige Mysterien in unbekannter Sprache rezitieren, haben eine quasi-hypnotische Wirkung und können oft stärker überzeugen als jedes logische Argument. Die protestantische Reformation war zu einem großen Teil eine Ablehnung dieses Irrtums. Wenn sie bewußt und bewußt verwendet wird, ist diese Irrtum besonders bösartig und erklärt einige der furchterregenden Überzeugungskraft der Kulte. Ein Beispiel für ein Argumentum ad Mysteriam ist das "Long Ago" und das "Far Away" - Falsche, die Tatsache, dass Tatsachen, Beweise, Praktiken oder Argumente aus alten Zeiten, fernen Ländern und / oder quotexotischen Kulturen eine besondere Gravitas oder Ethos zu erwerben scheinen Ihre Antike, Sprache oder Herkunft, z Öffentlich die heiligen Schriften in ihren ursprünglichen (meist unverständlichen) alten Sprachen zu singen und die griechischen, lateinischen, assyrischen oder altkirchlichen slawischen christlichen Liturgien über ihre einheimischen Versionen vorzuziehen oder klassische oder neu erfundene lateinische Namen für Irrtümer zu verwenden, um ihre Gültigkeit zu stützen. Siehe auch, Esoterisches Wissen. Argumentum von Silentio: Der Irrtum, dass, wenn vorhandene Quellen schweigen oder gegenwärtiges Wissen und Beweise nichts über ein gegebenes Thema oder eine Frage beweisen können, diese Tatsache an sich schon etwas über die Wahrheit der Sache beweist. Z. B. Wissenschaft kann uns nichts über Gott erzählen. Das beweist, dass Gott nicht existiert. quot Oder QuotScience gibt zu, dass es uns nichts über Gott erzählen kann, so dass Sie nicht leugnen können, dass Gott existsquot Oft missbraucht in der amerikanischen Justiz, wo im Gegensatz zu der 5. Änderung stille oder quottaking bleibt die Fifthquot oft falsch Dargestellt als Beweis der Schuld. Z. B. Mgr. Hixel hat kein Alibi für den Abend des 15. Januar. Dies beweist, dass er tatsächlich in Zimmer 331 im Schmugglers Inn, ermordet seine Frau mit einem Hatchet Im heutigen Amerika, die Wahl zu schweigen angesichts eines Polizeibeamten Fragen kann eine schuldige genug, um verhaftet oder sogar erschossen werden. Siehe auch, Argument von Ignorance. Verfügbarkeit Bias (auch: Attention Bias, Anchoring Bias): Ein Irrtum von Logos, die aus der natürlichen Tendenz hervorgehen, ungebührliche Aufmerksamkeit und Bedeutung für Informationen zu geben, die sofort zur Verfügung stehen, insbesondere die erste oder letzte erhaltene Information, und um breiter zu minimieren oder zu ignorieren Daten oder umfassendere Beweise, die eindeutig existieren, aber nicht so leicht erinnert oder zugegriffen werden. Z. B. "Wir wissen aus Erfahrung, dass dies nicht funktioniert, wenn quotexperiencequot bedeutet die neueste lokale Erfahrung, ignorieren überwältigende Erfahrung aus anderen Orten und Zeiten, wo es ha s gearbeitet und funktioniert. Dieser Irrtum bezieht sich auch auf den Irrtum von Hyperbole. Wo eine sofortige Instanz sofort verkündet wird, was die bedeutendste in der gesamten Geschichte der Menschheit ist, der Quotworst in der ganzen Welt. Dieser letztere Irrtum arbeitet sehr gut mit dem weniger gebildeten Publikum und denen, deren quasi-Weltquot sehr klein ist, das Publikum, das die Geschichte quottet Deren historisches Gedächtnis höchstens mehrere Wochen umfasst. The Bandwagon Fallacy (auch Argument aus gesunden Menschenverstand, Argumentum ad Populum): Der Irrtum der Argumentation, dass, weil quoteveryonequot angeblich denkt oder etwas tut, muss es richtig sein. Z. B. Ob es tatsächlich in großem Umfang Wähler-Betrug in Amerika oder nicht, die meisten Menschen jetzt glauben, gibt es und das macht es so. quot Manchmal schließt auch das Liegen mit Statistiken, z. B. Umfragen zeigen, dass über 75 von Amerikanern glauben, dass Senator Snith nicht die Wahrheit sagt. Für jedermann mit einem halben Gehirn, das schlüssig beweist hes ein schmutziger Lügner Dies wird manchmal mit dem quotArgumentum ad Baculum, z. B. Wie es oder nicht, seine Zeit, um Seiten zu wählen: Werden Sie an Bord des Zuges mit allen anderen zu bekommen, oder zermalmt unter den Rädern, wie es byquot zertreten wird. Für das Gegenteil dieser Argumentation sehen Sie die Romantische Rebell Irrtum. Siehe auch The Big Lie-Technik. Die große Lügentechnik (auch die mutig gestellte Lüge, die auf Message. quot steht): Der zeitgenössische Irrtum, eine Lüge, einen Irrtum, einen Slogan, eine Redewendung, eine Unsinnaussage oder eine irreführende Halbwahrheit immer wieder in verschiedenen Formen zu wiederholen (vgl Die Medien), bis es Teil des täglichen Diskurses wird und die Menschen glauben es ohne weitere Beweise oder Beweise. Manchmal ist die kühner und ausgefallener die Big Lie wird die mehr glaubwürdig scheint es zu einem willigen, meist wütend Publikum. Z. B. Was die jüdische Frage anging, war, dass, wenn diese besondere Phony-Debatte stattfand, es keine "Jüdische Frage" gab, die nur eine Nazi-Frage bezeichnete, aber kaum jemand an der Macht erkannte oder darüber sprechen wollte, während zu viele einfache Leute nur zu bereit waren Um einen bequemen Sündenbock für die Depression zu finden. Writer Miles J Brewer zertrümmerte die große Lügen-Technik in seiner (1930) Kurzgeschichte, theThe Gostak und die Doshes. quot Jedoch, mehr zeitgenössische Beispiele der Big-Lüge-Trugschluss könnte der völlig fiktive 4. August 1964 sein, der Tonkin Golf Incidentquot unter Lyndon zusammengebrannt wird Johnson als Rechtfertigung für die Eskalation des Vietnamkriegs oder die nicht existierenden "Massenvernichtungswaffen", die im Jahr 2003 als falsche Rechtfertigung verwendet wurden, im Irak, die im Jahr 2003 als "legitimierende, militärklingende Ethik des Alphabet-Soupquot" verliehen wurden Für das Eindringen dieses Landes. Die Erklärung des US-Präsidenten von November, 2016, dass in den Jahren, in denen amerikanische Amerikaner in Frage kamen, Präsidentschaftswahl scheint eine klassische große Lüge zu sein. Siehe auch, Bandwagon-Fallacy, Alphabet-Suppe und Propaganda. Blind Loyalty (auch Blind Obedience, Unthinking Obedience), die gefährliche Irrtum, dass ein Argument oder Handlung einfach nur und nur weil ein respektierter Führer oder Quelle (Präsident, Experte, Eltern, eigene Quoten, Team oder Land, ein Chef oder Kommandeure Offiziere) sagt, es ist richtig. Das ist eine übertriebene Autorität, ein schwer verderbtes Argument aus dem Ethos, das die Treue über die Wahrheit, über die eigene Vernunft und über das Gewissen legt. In diesem Fall versucht eine Person, falsches, dummes oder kriminelles Verhalten zu rechtfertigen, indem sie "das, was ich zu tun befohlen wurde, behauptete, oder ich habe nur Befehle befolgt." Siehe auch "Die Soldaten Ehre Fallacy. quot Ein nicht seltenes, aber extremes Beispiel Dieser Irrtum ist das grosse Gehirn / der kleine Gehirnfalsch (auch der Fuhrerprinzip), in dem ein tyrannischer Kult-Führer den Anhängern erzählt, mit den kleinen Gehirnen (dem Gehirn im Kopf) nicht zu denken, sondern mit eurem GROSSEN Hirn (die Führer) Das letzte ist manchmal in positiven Ausdrücken ausgedrückt, dh "Du musst dir keine Sorgen machen und Stress auf die Richtigkeit oder Falschheit dessen, was du tust, seit ich, der Führer. Ich nehme alle moralische und rechtliche Verantwortung für Ihr Handeln an. Ich werde euch verteidigen und alle Konsequenzen aufnehmen, bis hin zur ewigen Verdammnis, wenn Im falsch. dot Das Gegenteil von diesem letzten ist der Irrtum von quotPlausible Deniability. quot Siehe auch, Tust Itquot Blut ist dicker als Wasser (auch Favoritismus, Compadrismo , QuotFor my friends, anything. quot): Das Gegenteil der Quote Hominemquot Fallacy, ein korruptes Argument aus Ethos, wo eine Aussage, Argument oder Aktion automatisch als wahr, richtig und über Herausforderung angesehen wird, weil man verwandt ist, weiß und mag, Oder ist auf dem gleichen Team wie die einzelnen beteiligt. (ZB Mein Bruder-in-law sagt, dass er Sie goofing auf dem Job sah. Youre ein harter Arbeiter aber, wer ich glaube, Sie oder er Youre firedquot) Gehirnwäsche (auch Propaganda, quotRadicalization. quot): Der kalte Krieg - eine Phantasie, die ein Feind sofort über ein ahnungsloses Publikum mit ihrer gemeinen, aber irgendwie unsäglich überzeugenden Propaganda gewinnen kann QuotDont Blick auf die Website Theyre versuchen, Gehirnwäsche Sie mit ihren Propagandaquot Historisch bezieht sich quotbrainwashingquot richtiger auf die unmenschliche Argumentum ad Baculum des Zitats ein Argument inquot ein Gefangener über eine Kombination von Schmerzen, Angst, sensorischen oder Schlafentzug, längerer Missbrauch und anspruchsvolle psychologische Manipulation (auch das Stockholm-Syndrom. quot). Ein solches Krebszerstörungsquot kann auch durch Freude (z. B. Love Bombing, quot), z. B. »Wollen Sie, daß ich weiß, daß Sie das getan haben? Nun, theres viel mehr, wo das kam, wenn Sie sich mit usquot (siehe auch, quotBribery. quot) Eine unbeschreiblich unheimliche Form der Überzeugung durch Gehirnwäsche beinhaltet bewusst süchtig eine Person zu Drogen und dann die Bereitstellung oder Verweigerung der Substanz abhängig von der Süchtigen Compliance . Hinweis: Nur die quotother sidequot Gehirnwäsche. "Wir haben nie Gehirnwäsche. Bestechung (auch, Material Persuasion, Material Incentive, Financial Incentive). Die Täuschung der Quotienten durch Bestechung, Geschenke oder Gefälligkeiten, die Rückseite des Argumentum ad Baculum. Wie bekannt ist, wird jemand, der von Bestechung überzeugt wird, nur selten überzeugt, wenn die Bestechungsgelder nicht weiter kommen und mit der Zeit zunehmen. Im Zusammenhang mit diesem ist der Irrtum der Appeasement (auch, Das Quietschen Rad bekommt den Schmierfett), am häufigsten im Zusammenhang mit der schändlichen vor dem Zweiten Weltkrieg Beschwichtigung von Hitler aber immer noch üblich in öffentlichen Agenturen, Bildung und Einzelhandel heute praktiziert, z. B. Der Kunde hat immer Recht, auch wenn es falsch ist. Gerechtes Giveem, was sie wünschen, also theyll shut oben und gehen weg - sein preiswerteres und einfacher als ein Prozeß. Zirkularer Vernunft (auch, Der boshafte Kreis-Fang 22, Betteln der Frage, C irculus im P robando): Ein Irrtum der Firmenzeichen A ist wegen B, und B ist wegen A, zB "Sie können nicht einen Job ohne Erfahrung erhalten, und Sie können nicht Erfahrung ohne ein job. quot Verweist auch auf falsches Argumentieren, dass etwas wahr ist, indem Sie die gleiche Aussage in den verschiedenen Wörtern wiederholen. Z. B. Das Hexenproblem ist die dringlichste geistige Krise der Welt. Warum Hexen unsere Seelen bedrohen. Ein korruptes Argument aus Logos. Siehe auch die "Big Lie-Technik". Die komplexe Frage. Der zeitgenössische Irrtum, eine direkte Antwort auf eine Frage, die nicht beantwortet werden kann, zu beantworten, ohne zunächst die Frage selbst zu analysieren oder herauszufordern. Z. B. "Ja antworte mir, ja oder nein: Hast du gedacht, du könntest weg mit Plagiat und nicht leiden, die Konsequenzen quot? Oder, quotWhy haben Sie rauben, dass Bankquot gilt auch für Situationen, wo man gezwungen ist, akzeptieren oder ablehnen komplexe Standpunkte oder Vorschläge, die sowohl akzeptabel und Nicht akzeptable Teile. Eine Korruption des Arguments aus Logos. Ein Gegenstück zu Either / Or Reasoning. Bestätigung Bias: Ein Irrtum von Logos, erkennen die Tatsache, dass man immer tendenziell bemerken, suchen, auswählen und teilen Beweise, die eigenen Standpunkt und Überzeugungen, im Gegensatz zu entgegengesetzten Beweise bestätigt. Dieser Irrtum ist, wie quotquortune Tellersquot Arbeit - wenn mir gesagt wird, werde ich ein quottall, dunkler Fremdling treffen werde ich auf der Suche nach einem großen, dunklen Fremden, und wenn ich jemanden treffe, der auch nur geringfügig diese Beschreibung beschreibt, werde ich über die Korrektheit staunen Der Quotysychicsquot-Vorhersage. In der heutigen Zeit wird Bestätigung Bias am häufigsten in der Tendenz der verschiedenen Publikum zu suchen und folgen nur die Medien, die ihre gemeinsame ideologische und kulturelle Vorurteile zu bestätigen, manchmal zu einem Extrem, das eine falsche (implizite oder sogar explizite) Schlussfolgerung, dass führt Quoteveryonequot stimmt mit dieser Vorspannung überein. Siehe auch, quotHalf Truth, quot und quotDefensiveness. quot Cost Bias. Ein Irrtum des Ethos (der eines Produktes), die Tatsache, dass etwas teurer (entweder in Form von Geld oder etwas, das quothard foughtquot oder quothard wonquot ist) im Allgemeinen höher bewertet wird als etwas, das leichter oder billig, unabhängig von den Gegenständen erhalten wird Echte Qualität, Nutzen oder wahren Wert für den Käufer. Z. B. "Hey, ich arbeitete hart, um dieses Auto zu bekommen Es kann nichts anderes als ein Clunker, dass es nicht einen steilen Hügel, aber seine Mine, und zu mir sein besser als ein Millionär limo. quot ist Auch gilt für die Beurteilung der Qualität eines Artikels allein Nach Preis, Label, Marke oder Quelle, zB "Hey, du da in der K-Mart-Anzug Har-Harquot Standard-Bias: (auch, wenn es nicht gebrochen, nicht beheben itquot Acquiescence quotMaking diejenigen Frieden mit der Situation quot quotet, um itquot quotWhatever ist, ist rightquot quotIt ist, was es isquot quotLet es Sein, lassen Sie es bequot quotThis ist die beste aller möglichen Welten (oder, die einzige mögliche Welt) quotBetter der Teufel Sie wissen, als der Teufel Sie dont. quot). Der logische Irrtum der automatisch Begünstigung oder Annahme einer Situation, nur weil es gerade existiert, und argumentiert, dass jede andere Alternative ist wütend, unvorstellbar, unmöglich, oder zumindest würde zu viel Aufwand, Aufwand, Stress oder Risiko zu ändern. Das Gegenteil von diesem Irrtum ist der Nihilismus, der blind ablehnt, was zugunsten dessen, was sein könnte, die infantile Unordnung der romantisierenden Anarchie, des Chaos, der zerlegbaren Revolution, Defensivität (auch Wahlunterstützung): Ein Irrtum des Ethos (der eigenen), in dem man nach einer Entscheidung, einer Verpflichtung oder einem Handlungsablauf automatisch diese Entscheidung verteidigt und die gegensätzlichen Optionen irrational ablehnt Wenn sich eine Entscheidung später als wackelig oder falsch erweist. Z. B. Ja, ich habe für Snith gestimmt. Sicher, er erwies sich als ein Krummstab und ein Lügner und er hat uns in den Krieg, aber ich sage immer noch, dass damals war er besser als die verfügbaren Alternativenquot Siehe auch quotArgument von Inertiaquot und quotConfirmation Bias. quot Verminderte Verantwortung. Der gemeinsame zeitgenössische Irrtum der Anwendung eines spezialisierten Rechtsbegriffs (die strafrechtliche Strafe sollte weniger sein, wenn das Urteil beeinträchtigt wurde), um die Realität im Allgemeinen. Z. B. "Ich kann nicht zählen, dass ich am Montag abwesend bin - ich wurde vorbei gehängt und konnte nicht zur Klasse kommen, also sein nicht mein fault. quot Oder, quotYeah, beschleunigte ich auf der Autobahn und tötete einen Kerl, aber ich wurde aus meinem Verstand heraus und didnt Wissen, was ich tat so war es wichtig, dass much. quot In Wirklichkeit ist der Tod sehr viel für das Opfer, für seine Familie und Freunde und für die Gesellschaft im Allgemeinen. Ob der Täter hoch war oder nicht, spielt keine Rolle, da die Materialergebnisse gleich sind. Dazu gehört auch der Irrtum der Panik. Eine sehr häufige zeitgenössische Irrtum, dass die Worte oder Handlungen, egal wie schädlich oder böse, irgendwie nicht quotcountquot, weil quotI panickedquot Diese Irrtum ist verwurzelt in der Verwirrung der quotconsequencesquot mit quotpunishment. quot Disziplinarische Blinden. Eine sehr verbreitete zeitgenössische Gelehrsamkeit des Ethos (die einer Disziplin oder eines Feldes), die automatisch a priori ansonsten relevante Forschung, Argumente und Beweise, die von außerhalb der eigenen Berufsdisziplin, Diskursgemeinschaft oder akademischen Studienrichtung kommen, ignorieren, diskontieren oder ignorieren. Z. B. "Das kann wahr sein oder falsch sein, aber sein so nicht, was in unserem Feld jetzt tun würde, sehen Sie auch, quotStar Powerquot und quotTwo Truths. quot The quotDraw Your Own Conclusionquot Fallacy (auch die Nicht-Argument Argument Lassen Sie die Fakten sprechen Für sich selbst): In diesem Irrtum von Logos wird ein ansonsten nicht informiertes Publikum mit sorgfältig ausgewählten und gepflegten, zitternden Tatsachen vorgestellt und dann aufgefordert, ihre eigenen Schlussfolgerungen zu zitieren Zehntausende sind bei den Patzinak-Patzinaks mehr als doppelt so hoch als bei anderen ähnlichen Bevölkerungsgruppen - ziehen Sie Ihre eigenen Schlussfolgerungen. Es ist bekannt, dass diejenigen, die sich zu ihren eigenen Schlussfolgerungen quoten lassen, im Allgemeinen viel stärker überzeugt sind als jene Die sowohl Beweise als auch Schlussfolgerungen vorgebracht werden. Allerdings, Dr. William Lorimer weist darauf hin, dass "Die einzige rationale Antwort auf die Nicht-Argumentation ist Also, was was Was denken Sie, dass youve bewiesen, und warum / wie Sie denken, Sie haben itquot Nachgewiesen ist das bekannte quotLeading der Witnessquot Irrtum. Wo eine schein, sarkastische oder voreingenommene Frage nur gebeten wird, um eine gewünschte Antwort hervorzurufen. Equot für Anstrengung. (Auch Noble Effort The Lost Cause): Der gemeinsame zeitgenössische Irrtum, dass etwas richtig, wahr, wertvoll oder respektvoll und ehrwürdig sein muss, nur weil jemand so viel aufrichtige, gutgläubige Anstrengung oder sogar Opfer und Blutvergießen in sie gesetzt hat. (Siehe auch Appell an Pity Argument von Inertia Heroes All oder Sob Story.). Ein extremes Beispiel hierfür ist das Blut der Märtyrer Fallacy. Dass eine Sache oder ein Argument, egal wie fragwürdig oder verwerflich, nicht in Frage gestellt werden kann, ohne das Blut und Opfer derer, die so edel für die Sache gestorben sind, zu entehren. Z. B. Zögern Sie die patriotischen Zwickel / Das fleckte die Straßen von Baltimore. (Aus dem offiziellen Maryland State Song). Siehe auch Cost Bias, The Soldiers Honour Fallacy, und das Argument von Trägheit. (Falsches Dilemma, Falschdichotomie, Schwarz / Weiß Falsch, Falsch Binär): Ein Irrtum, der fälschlicherweise nur zwei Möglichkeiten bietet, obwohl eine breite Palette von möglichen Alternativen immer leicht verfügbar ist. Z. B. quotEither you are 100 Simon Straightarrow or you are as queer as a three dollar bill--its as simple as that and theres no middle groundquot Or, Either youre in with us all the way or youre a hostile and must be destroyed Whats it gonna bequot Also applies to falsely contrasting one option or case to another that is not really opposed, e. g. falsely countering quotBlack Lives Matterquot with quotBlue Lives Matterquot when in fact not a few police officers are themselves African American, and African Americans and police are not (or ought not to be) natural enemies. See also, Overgeneralization. Equivocation . The fallacy of deliberately failing to define ones terms, or knowingly and deliberately using words in a different sense than the one the audience will understand. (E. g. President Bill Clinton stating that he did not have sexual relations with quotthat woman, quot meaning no sexual penetration, knowing full well that the audience will understand his statement as quotI had no sexual contact of any sort with that woman. quot) This is a corruption of the argument from logos, and a tactic often used in American jurisprudence. Esoteric Knowledge (also Esoteric Wisdom Gnosticism Inner Truth): A fallacy from logos and ethos, that there is some knowledge reserved only for the Wise, the Holy or the Enlightened, things that the masses cannot understand and do not deserve to know, at least not until they become more quotspiritually advanced. quot The counterpart of this fallacy is that of Obscurantism (also Obscurationism Willful Ignorance), that (almost always said in a basso profundo voice) quotThere are some things that mere mortals must never seek to discoverquot E. g. quotScientific research on human sexuality is morally evil There are some things that humans are simply not meant to knowquot For the opposite of this latter, see the quotPlain Truth Fallacy. quot See also, Argumentum ad Mysteriam. Essentializing . A fallacy that proposes a person or thing is what it is and thats all that it is, and at its core will always be the way it is right now (E. g. quotAll terrorists are monsters, and will still be terrorist monsters even if they live to be 100,quot or quotThe poor you will always have with you, so any effort to eliminate poverty is pointless. quot). Also refers to the fallacy of arguing that something is a certain way quotby nature, quot an empty claim that no amount of proof can refute. (E. g. quotAmericans are cold and greedy by nature, quot or quotWomen are naturally better cooks than men. quot) See also quotDefault Bias. quot The opposite of this is the fallacy of Relativizing, blithely dismissing any and all arguments against ones standpoint by shrugging ones shoulders and responding that quotEverythings relative, quot or falsely invoking Einstein, Heisenbergs Uncertainty Principle or Quantum Weirdness to confuse, mystify or quotrefutequot an opponent. See also, quotRed Herringquot and quotAppeal to Nature. quot The Excluded Middle: A corrupted argument from logos that proposes that since a little of something is good, more must be better (or that if less of something is good, none at all is even better). Z. B. quotIf eating an apple a day is good for you, eating an all-apple diet is even betterquot or quotIf a low fat diet prolongs your life, a zero-fat diet should make you live foreverquot An opposite of this fallacy is that of Excluded Outliers . where one arbitrarily dismisses examples or results that disprove ones standpoint by simply describing them as quotWeird, quot quotOutliers, quot or quotAtypical. quot Also opposite is the fallacy of the Middle Path . where one demonstrates the quotreasonablenessquot of ones own standpoint (no matter how extreme) not on its own merits, but solely or mainly by presenting it as the only quotmoderatequot path between two obviously unacceptable alternatives. Z. B. Lenin successfully argued for Bolshevism as the only available quotmoderatequot middle path between bomb-throwing Nihilist terrorists on the ultra-left and a corrupt and hated Czarist autocracy on the right. The False Analogy . The fallacy of incorrectly comparing one thing to another in order to draw a false conclusion. Z. B. quotJust like an alley cat needs to prowl, a normal adult cant be tied down to one single lover. quot The opposite of this fallacy is the Sui Generis Fallacy . a postmodern stance that rejects the validity of analogy and of inductive reasoning altogether because any given person, place, thing or idea under consideration is quotsui generisquot i. e. unique, in a class unto itself. Finish the Job: The dangerous contemporary fallacy that an action or standpoint (or the continuation of the action or standpoint) may not be questioned or discussed because there is quota job to be done, quot falsely assuming all quotjobsquot are meaningless but never to be questioned. Sometimes those involved internalize (quotbuy intoquot) the quotjobquot and make the task a part of their own ethos. (E. g. quotOurs is not to reason why / Ours is but to do or die. quot) Related to this is the quot Just a Jobquot fallacy. (E. g. quotHow can torturers stand to look at themselves in the mirror But, I guess its OK because for them its just a job. quot) (See also quotBlind Loyalty, quot quotThe Soldiers Honor Fallacyquot and quotArgument from Inertia. quot) The Free Speech Fallacy: The infantile fallacy of responding to challenges to ones statements and standpoints by whining, quotIts a free country, isnt it I can say anything I want toquot A recent extreme case of this is the quot Safe Space, quot where one is not allowed to refute, challenge or even discuss anothers beliefs because that might be too uncomfortable or quottriggeryquot for emotionally fragile individuals. Gaslighting: A vicious fallacy of logic, deliberately twisting or distorting known facts, memories, scenes, events and evidence in order to disorient a vulnerable opponent and to make him or her doubt his/her sanity. This fallacy is named after British playwright Patrick Hamiltons 1938 stage play quotGas Light, quot also known as quotAngel Street. quot Guilt by Association: The fallacy of trying to refute or condemn someones standpoint, arguments or actions by evoking the negative ethos of those with whom one is identified or of a group, party, religion or race to which he or she belongs or once associated with. A form of Ad Hominem Argument. z. B. quotDont listen to her. Shes a Republican so you cant trust anything she says, quot or quotAre you or have you ever been a member of the Communist Partyquot An extreme instance of this is the Machiavellian quotFor my enemies, nothingquot Fallacy . where real or perceived quotenemiesquot are always wrong and must be conceded nothing, not even the time of day, e. g. quotHes a Republican, so even if he said the sky is blue I wouldnt believe him. quot The Half Truth (also Card Stacking, Stacking the Deck, Incomplete Information): A corrupt argument from logos, the fallacy of consciously selecting, collecting and sharing only that evidence that supports ones own standpoint, telling the strict truth but deliberately minimizing or omitting important key details in order to falsify the larger picture and support a false conclusion.(e. g. The truth is that Bangladesh is one of the worlds fastest growing countries and can boast of a young, ambitious and hard-working population, a warm climate, low cost medical and dental care, a multitude of places of worship, a delicious, spicy local cuisine and a swinging nightclub scene. Taken together, all these facts clearly prove that Bangladesh is one of the worlds most desirable places for young families to live, work and raise a family.) See also, Confirmation Bias. Hero-Busting (also, quotThe Perfect is the Enemy of the Goodquot): A fallacy of ethos under which, since nothing and nobody in this world is perfect there are not and have never been any heroes: Washington and Jefferson held slaves, Lincoln was (by our contemporary standards) a racist, Karl Marx had a kid by the housemaid, Martin Luther King Jr. had an eye for women too, Lenin condemned feminism, the Mahatma drank his own urine (ugh), the Pope is wrong on capitalism, same-sex marriage and womens ordination, Mother Teresa loved suffering and was wrong on just about everything else too, etc. etc Also applies to the now nearly-universal political tactic of ransacking everything an opponent has said, written or done since infancy in order to find something to misinterpret or condemn (and we all have something ). An early example of this latter is deftly described in Robert Penn Warrens classic (1946) novel, All the Kings Men . This is the opposite of the quotHeroes Allquot fallacy. Heroes All (also, quotEverybodys a Winnerquot): The contemporary fallacy that everyone is above average or extraordinary. A corrupted argument from pathos (not wanting anyone to lose or to feel bad). Thus, every member of the Armed Services, past or present, who served honorably is a national hero, every student who competes in the Science Fair wins a ribbon or trophy, and every racer is awarded a winners yellow jersey. This corruption of the argument from pathos, much ridiculed by American humorist Garrison Keeler, ignores the fact that if everybody wins nobody wins, and if everyones a hero no ones a hero. The logical result of this fallacy is that, as childrens author Alice Childress writes (1973), quota hero aint nothing but a sandwich. quot See also the quotSoldiers Honor Fallacy. quot I Wish I Had a Magic Wand: The fallacy of regretfully (and falsely) proclaiming oneself powerless to change a bad or objectionable situation. Z. B. quotWhat can we do about gas prices As Secretary of Energy I wish I had a magic wand, but I dontquot shrug . Or, quotNo, you cant quit piano lessons. I wish I had a magic wand and could teach you piano overnight, but I dont, so like it or not, you have to keep on practicing. quot The parent, of course, ignores the possibility that the child may not want or need to learn piano. See also, TINA. The Identity Fallacy (also, quotDie away, ye old forms and logicquot ): A corrupt postmodern argument from ethos, a variety of the Argumentum ad Hominem in which the validity of ones logic, evidence, experience or arguments depend not on their own strength but rather on whether the one arguing is a member of a given social class, group or subgroup. Z. B. quotThis is fine as a general principle, but we Patzinaks use a different logic. quot Or, in extreme cases, quotThis logic is fine for Patzinaks, even for Patzinaks who are metrosexual, but what about metrosexual apoplectic Patzinaksquot Identity fallacies are occasionally self-interested, driven by the egotistical ambitions of would-be group leaders anxious to make their own careers carving out a special identity group to lead to the exclusion of existing broader-based leadership. The Identity Fallacy can lead to scorn or rejection of useful quotallies, quot real or prospective, and an exclusivist, cultish quotdo for selfquot philosophy which in todays world virtually guarantees self marginalization and ultimate defeat. Conversely, valid opposing evidence and arguments are brushed aside without comment or consideration, as simply not worth arguing about, solely because of the lack of proper racial, ethnic or gender background of the person making the argument, or because the one arguing does not self-identify as a member of the identity quotin-group. quot E. g. quotYoud understand me if you were Burmese but since youre not theres no way I can explain it to you, quot or quotNobody but a nurse can know what a nurse has to go through. quot The Jobs Comforter Fallacy (also, quotKarma is a bihquot quotWhat goes around comes around. quot): The fallacy that since there is no such thing as random chance and we (I, my group, or my country) are under special protection of heaven, any misfortune or natural disaster that we suffer must be a punishment for our own or someone elses secret sin or open wickedness. The opposite of the Appeal to Heaven, this is the fallacy employed by the Westboro Baptist Church members who protest fallen service members funerals all around the United States. See also, Magical Thinking. Just Do it. ( also , quotFind a wayquot quotI dont care how you do itquot quotAccomplish the missionquot quotBy Any Means Necessary. quot ): A pure, abusive Argumentum ad Baculum (argument from force), in which someone in power arbitrarily waves aside or overrules the moral objections of subordinates or followers and orders them to accomplish a goal by any means required, fair or foul The clear implication is that unethical or immoral methods should be used. Z. B. quotYou say theres no way you can finish the dig on schedule because theres an old unmarked graveyard on the excavation site Well, find a way I dont want to know how you do it, just do it This is a million dollar contract and we need it done by Tuesday. quot See also, Plausible Deniability. Just Plain Folks (also, quotValuesquot ): This corrupt modern argument from ethos argues to a less-educated or rural audience that the one arguing is quotjust plain folksquot who is a quotplain talker, quot quotsays what s/he is thinking, quot and thinks like the audience, and is thus worthy of belief, unlike some East Coast Liberal, quotdouble-domed professor, quot quotWashington bureaucrat, quot quottree-huggerquot or other despised outsider who quotdoesnt think like we doquot or quotdoesnt share our traditional values. quot This is a counterpart to the Ad Hominem Fallacy and occasionally carries a distinct flavor of xenophobia or racism as well. This also includes the fallacy that quotWere just plain folks so we need to keep our heads down and not get involved in the big things of this world, like politics, demonstrations or protests. quot See also the Plain Truth Fallacy and the Simpletons Fallacy. The Law of Unintended Consequences (also, quotEvery Revolution Ends up Eating its own Young:quot Grit Resilience Doctrine) : In this very dangerous, archly pessimistic postmodern fallacy the bogus quotLaw of Unintended Consequences, quot once a semi-humorous satirical corollary of quotMurphys Law, quot is elevated to to the status of an iron law of history. This fallacy arbitrarily proclaims a priori that since we can never know everything or foresee anything . sooner or later in todays quotcomplex worldquot unforeseeable adverse consequences and negative side effects (so-called quotunknown unknownsquot) will always end up blindsiding and overwhelming, defeating and vitiating any and all quotdo-gooderquot efforts to improve our world. Instead, we must always expect defeat and be ready to roll with the punches by developing quotgritquot or quotresiliencequot as a primary survival skill. This nihilist fallacy is a practical negation of the the possibility of any argument from logos. See also, TINA. Lying with Statistics . The contemporary fallacy of using true figures and numbers to prove unrelated claims. (e. g. quotCollege tuition costs have actually never been lower. When expressed as a percentage of the national debt, the cost of getting a college education is actually far lower today than it was in 1965quot). A corrupted argument from logos, often preying on the publics perceived or actual mathematical ignorance. This includes the Tiny Percentage Fallacy . that an expense that is quite significant in and of itself somehow becomes insignificant simply because its a tiny percentage of something much larger. Z. B. a consumer who would choke on spending an extra dollar for two cans of peas will typically ignore 50 extra on the price of a car or 1000 extra on the price of a house simply because these differences are quotonlyquot a tiny percentage of the much larger amount being spent. Historically, sales taxes or value-added taxes have successfully gained public acceptance and remain quotunder the radarquot because of this latter fallacy, even though amounting to hundreds or thousands of dollars a year in taxation. See also Half-truth, Snow Job, and Red Herring. Magical Thinking (also, the Sin of Presumption). An ancient but deluded fallacy of logos, that when it comes to quotcrunch time, quot provided one has enough faith, prays hard enough, does the right rituals, or quotclaims the promise, quot God will always suspend the laws of the universe and work a miracle at the request of or for the benefit of the True Believer. In practice this nihilist fallacy denies the existence of a rational or predictable universe and thus the possibility of any valid argument from logic. See also, Positive Thinking, the Appeal to Heaven, and the Jobs Comforter fallacy. Mala Fides (Arguing in Bad Faith also Sophism): Using an argument that the arguer himself or herself knows is not valid. Z. B. An unbeliever attacking believers by throwing verses from their own Holy Scriptures at them. or a lawyer arguing for the innocence of someone whom s/he knows full well to be guilty. This latter is a common practice in American jurisprudence, and is sometimes portrayed as the worst face of quotSophism. quot Special thanks to Bradley Steffens for pointing out this fallacy Included under this fallacy is the fallacy of Motivational Truth ( also , Demagogy) . deliberately lying to quotpeoplequot to motivate them toward some action the rhetor perceives to be desirable (using evil discursive means toward a good material end). A particularly bizarre and corrupt form of this latter fallacy is Self Deception (also, Whistling by the Graveyard ) . in which one deliberately and knowingly deludes oneself in order to achieve a goal, or perhaps simply in order to suppress anxiety and maintain ones energy level, enthusiasm, morale, peace of mind or sanity in moments of adversity. Measurability: A corrupt argument from logos and ethos (that of science and mathematics), the modern Fallacy of Measurability proposes that if something cannot be measured and quantified it does not exist, or is quotnothing but touchy-feely stuffquot unworthy of serious consideration, i. e. mere anecdotal gossip or subjective opinion. Moral Licensing: The contemporary ethical fallacy that ones consistently moral life, good behavior or recent extreme suffering or sacrifice earns him/her the right to commit an immoral act without repercussions, consequences or punishment. Z. B. quotIve been good all year, so one bad wont matter, quot or quotAfter what Ive been through, God knows I need this. quot The fallacy of Moral Licensing is also sometimes applied to nations, e. g. quotThose who criticize repression and the Gulag in the former USSR forget what extraordinary suffering the Russians went through in World War II and the millions upon millions who died. quot See also Argument from Motives. The opposite of this fallacy is the (excessively rare in our times) ethical fallacy of Scruples, in which one obsesses to pathological excess about ones accidental, forgotten, unconfessed or unforgiven sins and because of them, the seemingly inevitable prospect of eternal damnation. Mortification: (also, Live as Though Youre Dying Pleasure-hating No Pain No Gain): An ancient fallacy of logos, trying to quotbeat the flesh into submissionquot by extreme ascetic practices, deliberate starvation or infliction of pain, denying the undeniable fact that discomfort and pain exist for the purpose of warning of lasting damage to the body. Extreme examples of this fallacy are various forms of self-flagellation such as practiced by the New Mexico quot Penitentes quot during Holy Week or by Shia devotees during Muharram. More common contemporary manifestations of this fallacy are extreme quotinsanityquot exercise regimes not intended for normal health, fitness or competitive purposes but just to quottoughenquot or quotpunishquot the body. Some contemporary experts suggest that self-mortification (a word related to the Latin/French root quotmort, quot or quotdeath. quot) is in fact quotsuicide on the installment plan. quot Others suggest that it involves a narcotic-like addiction to the bodys natural endorphins. The opposite of this fallacy is Hedonism . seeking physical pleasure simply for pleasures sake. Moving the Goalposts: A fallacy of logos, demanding a certain degree of proof or evidence and then when this is offered, demanding even more, different or better evidence in order to validate an argument or establish a fact. MYOB (Mind Your Own Business also Youre Not the Boss of Me quotSo Whatquot, The Appeal to Privacy): The contemporary fallacy of arbitrarily terminating any discussion of ones own standpoints or behavior, no matter how absurd, dangerous, evil or offensive, by drawing a phony curtain of privacy around oneself and ones actions. A corrupt argument from ethos (your own). (E. g. quotSure, I was doing eighty and weaving between lanes on Mesa Street--whats it to you Youre not a cop, youre not my nanny. Its my business to speed, and your business to get the hell out of my way. Mind your own businessquot Or, quotYeah, I killed my baby. So what Butt out Its none of your businessquot) Rational discussion is cut off because quotit is none of your businessquot See also, quotTaboo. quot The counterpart of this is quot Nobody Will Ever Know, quot (also quotWhat happens in Vegas stays in Vegasquot quotI Think Were Alone Now, quot or the Heart of Darkness Syndrome) the fallacy that just because nobody important is looking (or because one is on vacation, or away in college, or overseas) one may freely commit immoral, selfish, negative or evil acts at will without expecting any of the normal consequences or punishment. Author Joseph Conrad graphically describes this sort of moral degradation in the character of Kurtz in his classic novel, The Heart of Darkness . Name-Calling: A variety of the quotAd Hominemquot argument. The dangerous fallacy that, simply because of who one is, any and all arguments, disagreements or objections against ones standpoint or actions are automatically racist, sexist, anti-Semitic, bigoted, discriminatory or hateful. Z. B. quotMy stand on abortion is the only correct one. To disagree with me, argue with me or question my judgment in any way would only show what a pig you really are. quot Also applies to refuting an argument by simply calling it a quotfallacy, quot or declaring it invalid without proving why it is invalid, or summarily dismissing arguments or opponents by labeling them quotracist, quot quotcommunist, quot quotfascist, quot or some other negative name without further explanation. A subset of this is the Newspeak fallacy, creating identification with a certain kind of audience by inventing or using racist or offensive, sometimes military-sounding nicknames for common enemies, e. g. quotThe damned DINOs are even worse than the Repugs and the Neocons. quot Or, quotIn the Big One it took us only five years to beat both the Jps and the Jerries, so more than a decade and a half after niner-eleven why is it so hard for us to beat a raggedy bunch of Hajjis and Towel-headsquot Note that originally the word quotNaziquot belonged in this category, but this term has long come into use as a proper English noun. See also, quotReductionism, quot quotAd Hominem Argument, quot and quotAlphabet Soup. quot No Discussion (also No Negotiation, the Control Voice, Peace through Strength, Muscular Foreign Policy, Fascism): A pure Argumentum ad Baculum that rejects reasoned dialogue, offering either instant, unconditional compliance/surrender or defeat/death as the only two options for settling even minor differences. Z. B. quotGet down on the ground, now quot or quotWe dont talk to terrorists. quot This deadly fallacy falsely paints real or potential quothostilesquot as monsters devoid of all reason, and far too often contains a very strong element of quotmachismoquot as well. I. e. quotA real, muscular leader never resorts to pantywaist pleading, apologies, fancy talk or argument. Thats for lawyers, liars and pansies and is nothing but a delaying tactic. A real man stands tall, talks straight, draws fast and shoots to kill. quot The late actor John Wayne frequently portrayed this fallacy in his movie roles. See also, The Pout. Non-recognition: A deluded fallacy in which one deliberately chooses not to publicly quotrecognizequot ground truth, usually on the theory that this would somehow reward evil-doers if we recognize their deeds as real. Often the underlying theory is that the situation is quottemporaryquot and will soon be reversed. Z. B. In the decades from 1949 until Richard Nixons presidency the United States officially refused to recognize the existence of the most populous nation on earth, the Peoples Republic of China, because America supported the U. S.-friendly Republic of China government on Taiwan instead and hoped they might return to power on the mainland. Perversely, in 2016 the U. S. President-Elect caused a significant international flap by chatting with the President of the government on Taiwan, a de facto violation of long-standing American non-recognition of that same regime. More than half a century after the Korean War the U. S. still refuses to pronounce the name of or recognize a nuclear-armed DPRK (North Korea). An individual who does this risks institutionalization (e. g. quotI refuse to recognize Moms murder, cuz that would give the victory to the murderer I refuse to watch you bury her Stop Stopquot) but tragically, such behavior is only too common in international relations. See also the State Actor Fallacy, Political Correctness, and The Pout. The Non Sequitur . The fallacy of offering reasons or conclusions that have no logical connection to the argument at hand (e. g. The reason I flunked your course is because the U. S. government is now printing purple five-dollar bills Purple ). (See also Red Herring.) Occasionally involves the breathtaking arrogance of claiming to have special knowledge of why God, fate or the Universe is doing certain things. Z. B. quotThis weeks earthquake was obviously meant to punish those people for their great wickedness. quot Nothing New Under the Sun (also, Seen it all before quotSurprise, surprisequot quotPlus a change, plus cest la mme chose. quot). Fairly rare in contemporary discourse, this deeply cynical fallacy, a corruption of the argument from logos, falsely proposes that there is not and has never been any real novelty in this world. Any argument that there are truly new ideas or phenomena is judged a priori to be unworthy of serious discussion and dismissed with a jaded sigh and a wave of the hand as quotthe same old same old. quot E. g. Sigh Idiots Dont you see that the current influx of refugees from the Mideast is just the same old Muslim invasion of Europe thats been going on for 1,400 years Or, Libertarianism is nothing but re-warmed anarchism, which, in turn, is nothing but the ancient Antinomian Heresy. Like I told you before, theres nothing new under the sun Olfactory Rhetoric (also, quotThe Nose Knowsquot): A vicious, animal-level fallacy of pathos in which opponents are dismissed, marginalized, dehumanized or hated primarily based on their supposed odor, lack of personal cleanliness, or filth. E. g. quotThose demonstrators are demanding something, but Ill only talk to them if first they go home and take a bathquot Or, quotI can smell a Jew a block awayquot Also applies to demeaning other cultures or nationalities based on their differing cuisines, e. g. quotI dont care what they say, their breath always stinks of garlic. And have you ever smelled their kitchensquot See also, quotTheyre Not Like Us. quot Oops (also, quotOh, I forgot. quot quotThe Judicial Surprise, quot quotThe October Surprise, quot): A corrupt argument from logos in which toward the end of a discussion or debate an opponent suddenly, elaborately and usually sarcastically shams having just remembered or uncovered some salient fact, argument or evidence. Z. B. quotOops, I forgot to ask you: You were convicted of this same offense twice before, werent youquot Also applies to quotdiscoveringquot and sensationally reporting some potentially damning information or evidence and then, after the damage has been done, quietly declaring at the last moment, quotOops, I guess that really wasnt that significant after all. Sorry. quot Overexplanation: A fallacy of logos stemming from the paradox that beyond a certain point, more explanation, instructions, data or discussion inevitably results in less, not more, understanding. Contemporary urban mythology holds that this fallacy is typically male (quot Mansplaining quot), while barely half a century ago the prevailing myth was that it was men who were non-verbal while women would typically overexplain (e. g. the 1960 hit song by Joe Jones, quotYou Talk Too Muchquot). quotMansplainingquot is, according to scholar Danelle Pecht, quotthe infuriating tendency of many men to always have to be the smartest person in the room, regardless of the topic of discussion and how much they actually knowquot See also the quotPlain Truthquot fallacy. Overgeneralization (also Hasty Generalization Totus pro Partes Fallacy the Merological Fallacy ): A fallacy of logos where a broad generalization that is agreed to be true is offered as overriding all particular cases, particularly special cases requiring immediate attention. Z. B. quotDoctor, you say that this time of year a flu vaccination is essential. but I would counter that ALL vaccinations are essentialquot (implying that Im not going to give special attention to getting the flu shot). Or, attempting to refute quotBlack Lives Matterquot by replying, All Lives Matter, quot the latter undeniably true but still a fallacious overgeneralization in that specific and urgent context. quotOvergeneralizationquot also includes the the Pars pro Toto Fallacy . the stupid but common fallacy of incorrectly applying one or two true examples to all cases. Z. B. Some college student was tailgating me all the way up North Main Street last night. This proves that all college students are lousy drivers and that we should pull their drivers licenses until they grow up, learn to drive or graduate The Paralysis of Analysis (also, Procrastination the Nirvana Fallacy): A postmodern fallacy that since all data is never in, any conclusion is always provisional, no legitimate decision can ever be made and any action should always be delayed until forced by circumstances. A corruption of the argument from logos. (See also quotLaw of Unintended Consequences. quot) The Passive Voice Fallacy (also, the Bureaucratic Passive): A fallacy from ethos, concealing human agency behind the curtain of the grammatical passive voice, e. g. quotIt has been decided that you will be let go, quot arrogating an ethos of cosmic infallibility and inevitability to a very fallible conscious decision made by identifiable and fallible human beings. Paternalism: A serious fallacy of ethos, arbitrarily tut-tutting, dismissing or ignoring anothers concerns as quotchildishquot or quotimmaturequot taking a condescending attitude of superiority toward opposing arguments or toward opponents themselves. Z. B. quotYour argument against the war is so infantile. Try approaching the issue like an adult for a change, quot quotI dont argue with children, quot or quotSomebody has to be the grownup in the room, and it might as well be me. Heres why youre wrong. quot Also refers to the sexist fallacy of dismissing a womans argument because she is a woman, e. g. quotOh, it must be that time of the month, ehquot See also quotAd Hominem Argument. quot The Plain Truth Fallacy (also, the Simple Truth fallacy, Salience Bias, the KISS Principle Keep it Short and Simple, the Executive Summary): A fallacy of logos favoring familiar or easily comprehensible data, examples and evidence over that which is more complex and unfamiliar but much closer to the truth. Z. B. quotOoooh, look at all those equations and formulas Just boil it down to the Simple Truth, quot or quotI dont want your damned philosophy lesson Just tell me the Plain Truth about why this is happening. quot A more sophisticated version of this fallacy arbitrarily proposes, as did 18th century Scottish rhetorician John Campbell, that the Truth is always simple by nature and only malicious enemies of the Truth would ever seek to make it complicated. (See also, The Snow Job, and Overexplanation.) The opposite of this is the postmodern fallacy of Ineffability or Complexity (also, Truthiness Post-Truth), . arbitrarily declaring that todays world is so complex that there is no truth, or that Truth (capital-T), if indeed such a thing exists, is unknowable except perhaps by God and is thus forever inaccessible and irrelevant to us mere finite mortals, making any cogent argument from logos impossible. See also the Big Lie, and Paralysis of Analysis. Plausible Deniability: A vicious fallacy of ethos under which someone in power forces those under his or her control to do some questionable or evil act and to then falsely assume or conceal responsibility for that act in order to protect the ethos of the one in command. Z. B. quotArrange a fatal accident but make sure I know nothing about itquot Playing on Emotion (also, the Sob Story the Pathetic Fallacy the quotBleeding Heartquot fallacy): The classic fallacy of pure argument from pathos, ignoring facts and calling on emotion alone. Z. B. If you dont agree that witchcraft is a major problem just shut up, close your eyes for a moment and picture in your mind all those poor moms crying bitter tears for their innocent tiny children whose cozy little beds and happy tricycles lie all cold and abandoned, just because of those wicked old witches Lets stringem all up The opposite of this is the Apathetic Fallacy (also, Cynicism Burnout Compassion Fatigue), where any and all legitimate arguments from pathos are brushed aside because, as country music artist Jo Dee Messina sang (2005), quotMy give-a-damns busted. quot Also associated with the Pathetic Fallacy is the ancient fallacy of Refinement (quot Real Feelingsquot), where certain classes of living beings such as plants and animals, infants, babies and minor children, barbarians, slaves, deep-sea sailors, farmworkers, criminals and convicts, refugees, addicts, terrorists, foreigners, the poor, or quotthe lower classesquot in general are deemed incapable of experiencing real pain like we do, or of having any quot real feelingsquot at all, only brutish appetites, vile lusts, animal instincts, evil drives, filthy cravings and automatic tropisms. See also, Theyre Not Like Us. Political Correctness (quotPCquot): A postmodern fallacy, a counterpart of the quotName Callingquot fallacy, supposing that the nature of a thing or situation can be changed by simply changing its name. Z. B. quotToday we strike a blow for animal rights and against cruelty to animals by changing the name of pets to animal companions. quot Or quotNever, ever play the victim card, because its so manipulative and sounds so negative, helpless and despairing. Instead of saying victims, we are proud to be survivors. quot (Of course, when quotvictimsquot disappear then perpetrators conveniently vanish as well) Also applies to other forms of political quot Language Control, quot e. g. being careful never to refer to North Korea or ISIS/ISIL by their rather pompous proper names (quotthe Democratic Peoples Republic of Koreaquot and quotthe Islamic State, quot respectively) or to the Syrian government as the quotSyrian government, quot (Its always the quotRegimequot or the quotDictatorship. quot). See also, Non-recognition. The Pollyanna Principle (also, quotProjection Bias, quot quotTheyre Just Like Us, quot quotSinging Kumbaya. quot): A traditional, often tragic fallacy of ethos, that of automatically (and falsely) assuming that everyone else in any given place, time and circumstance had or has basically the same wishes, desires, interests, concerns, ethics and moral code as quotwequot do. This fallacy practically if not theoretically denies both the reality of difference and the human capacity to chose radical evil. Z. B. arguing that quotThe only thing most Nazi Storm Troopers wanted was the same thing we do, to live in peace and prosperity and to have a good family life, quot when the reality was radically otherwise. Dr. William Lorimer offers this explanation: quot The Projection Bias is the flip side of the Theyre Not Like Us fallacy. The Projection bias (fallacy) is Theyre just people like me, therefore they must be motivated by the same things that motivate me. For example: I would never pull a gun and shoot a police officer unless I was convinced he was trying to murder me therefore, when Joe Smith shot a police officer, he must have been in genuine fear for his life. I see the same fallacy with regard to Israel: The people of Gaza just want to be left in peace therefore, if Israel would just lift the blockade and allow Hamas to import anything they want, without restriction, they would stop firing rockets at Israel. That may or may not be true - I personally dont believe it - but the argument clearly presumes that the people of Gaza, or at least their leaders, are motivated by a desire for peaceful co-existence. quot The Pollyanna Principle was gently but expertly demolished in the classic twentieth-century American cartoon series, quotThe Flintstones, quot in which the humor lay in the absurdity of picturing quotStone Agequot characters having the same concerns, values and lifestyles as mid-twentieth century white working class Americans. This is the opposite of the quotTheyre Not Like Usquot fallacy. (Note: The Pollyanna Principle fallacy should not be confused with a psychological principle of the same name which observes that positive memories are usually retained more strongly than negative ones. ) The Positive Thinking Fallacy: An immensely popular but deluded modern fallacy of logos, that because we are quotthinking positivelyquot that in itself somehow biases external, objective reality in our favor even before we lift a finger to act. See also, Magical Thinking. Note that this particular fallacy is often part of a much wider closed-minded, sometimes cultish ideology where the practitioner is warned against paying attention to to or even acknowledging the existence of quotnegativequot evidence or counter-arguments against his/her standpoints. In the latter case rational discussion, argument or refutation is most often futile. The Post Hoc Argument . (also, quotPost Hoc Propter Hocquot quotToo much of a coincidence, quot the quotClustering Illusionquot): The classic paranoiac fallacy of attributing imaginary causality to random coincidences, concluding that just because something happens close to, at the same time as, or just after something else, the first thing is caused by the second. Z. B. quotAIDS first emerged as a problem back in the very same era when Disco music was becoming popular--thats too much of a coincidence: It proves that Disco caused AIDSquot The Pout (also The Silent Treatment Nonviolent Civil Disobedience Noncooperation). An Argumentum ad Baculum that arbitrarily rejects or gives up on dialogue before it is concluded. The most benign nonviolent form of this fallacy is found in passive-aggressive tactics such as slowdowns, boycotts, lockouts, sitdowns and strikes. Under Barack Obama the United States ended a half-century long political Pout with Cuba. See also quotNo Discussionquot and quotNonrecognition. quot The Red Herring (also, Distraction): An irrelevant argument, attempting to mislead an audience by bringing up an unrelated but emotionally loaded issue. Z. B. quotIn regard to my several bankruptcies and recent indictment for corruption lets be straight up about whats really important: Terrorism Vote for me and Ill fight those terrorists anywhere in the worldquot Also applies to raising unrelated issues as falsely opposing the issue at hand, e. g. quotYou say Black Lives Matter, quot but I would rather say Zika Mattersquot when the two contentions are in no way opposed, only competing for attention. See also Availability Bias. Reductio ad Hitlerum (or, ad Hitleram): A highly problematic contemporary historical-revisionist contention that the argument quotThats just what Hitler said (or would have said, or would have done)quot is a fallacy, an instance of the Ad Hominem argument and/or Guilt by Association. Whether the Reductio ad Hitlerum can be considered an actual fallacy or not seems to fundamentally depend on ones personal view of Hitler and the gravity of his crimes. Reductionism . (also, Oversimplifying, Sloganeering): The fallacy of deceiving an audience by giving simple answers or bumper-sticker slogans in response to complex questions, especially when appealing to less educated or unsophisticated audiences. Z. B. quotIf the glove doesnt fit, you must vote to acquit. quot Or, quotVote for Snith. Hes tough on terrorismquot In science, technology, engineering and mathematics (quotSTEM subjectsquot) reductionism is intentionally practiced to make intractable problems computable, e. g. the well-known humorous suggestion, quotFirst, lets assume the cow is a spherequot. Reifying . The fallacy of treating imaginary categories as actual, material quotthings. quot (E. g. quotThe War against Terror is a never-ending fight to the death between Freedom and Absolute Evilquot) Sometimes also referred to as quot Essentializin gquot or Hypostatization . The Romantic Rebel (also, the Truthout Fallacy the Brave Heretic Conspiracy theories the Iconoclastic Fallacy): The contemporary fallacy of claiming truth or validity for ones standpoint solely or primarily because one is supposedly standing up heroically to the prevailing quotorthodoxy, quot the current Standard Model, conventional wisdom or politics, or whatever may be the Bandwagon of the moment a corrupt argument from ethos. Z. B. quotBack in the day the scientific establishment thought that the world was flat, until Columbus proved them wrong Now they want us to believe that ordinary water is nothing but H 2, O. Are you going to believe them The government is frantically trying to suppress the truth that our drinking-water supply actually has nitrogen in it and causes congenital vampirism And what about Area 51 Dont you care Or are you just a kiss-up for the corrupt corporate Washington establishmentquot The opposite of the Bandwagon fallacy. The quotSave the Childrenquot Fallacy (also, The Humanitarian Crisis): A cruel and cynical contemporary media-driven fallacy of pathos, attracting public support for intervention in somebody elses crisis in a distant country by repeatedly showing in gross detail the extreme suffering of the precious, innocent little children (occasionally extended even to their pets) of quotourquot side, conveniently ignoring the reality that innocent children on all sides usually suffer the most in any war, conflict, famine or crisis. Recent examples include the quotRohingyaquot in Myanmar/Burma (ignoring multiple other ethnicities sufferubg ongoing poverty and conflict there), children in rebel-held areas of Syria (areas held by our rebels, not by the Islamic State rebels), and the children of Mediterranean boat-people (from the Mideast and Afghanistan, but no t those from North or sub-Saharan Africa who are evidently deemed less worthy of pity). Scapegoating (also, Blamecasting): The ancient fallacy that whenever something goes wrong theres always someone other than oneself to blame. Although sometimes this fallacy is a practical denial of randomness or chance itself. today it is more often a mere insurance-driven business decision (quotI dont care if it was an accident Somebody with deep pockets is gonna pay for thisquot), though often scapegoating is no more than a cynical ploy to shield those truly responsible from blame. A particularly corrupt and cynical example of this is Blaming the Victim, in which one falsely casts the blame for ones own evil or questionable actions on those affected, e. g. quotIf you move an eyelash Ill have to kill you and youll be to blamequot or quotYou bih, you dressed immodestly and made me rape you Then you went and snitched on me and now Im going to prison and every bit of it is your faultquot See also, the Affective Fallacy. The Scare Tactic (also Appeal to Paranoia): A variety of Playing on Emotions, a raw appeal to fear. A corrupted argument from pathos.(E. g. quotIf you dont shut up and do what I say were all gonna die In this moment of crisis we cant afford the luxury of criticizing or trying to second-guess my decisions when our very lives and freedom are in peril Instead, we need to be united as onequot) See also, quotWe Have to do Something. quot See also, the Worst Case Fallacy. Sending the Wrong Message . A dangerous fallacy of logos that attacks a given statement, argument or action, no matter how true or necessary, because it will quotsend the wrong message. quot In effect, those who use this fallacy are openly confessing to fraud and admitting that the truth will destroy the fragile web of illusion that has been created by their lies. Z. B. quotActually, were losing the war against drugs hands down, but if we publicly admit it well be sending the wrong message. quot See also, quotMala Fides. quot Shifting the Burden of Proof . A classic fallacy of logos that challenges an opponent to disprove a claim rather than asking the person making the claim to defend his/her own argument. Z. B. quotThese days space-aliens are everywhere among us, masquerading as true humans, even right here on campus I dare you prove it isnt so See You cant You admit it That means what I say has to be true. Most probably, youre one of themquot The most typical tactic in using this fallacy is to get an opponent to admit that a far-fetched claim is indeed quotpossible, quot and then declare the claim quotprovenquot absent your evidence to the contrary. Z. B. quotSo you admit that massive undetected voter fraud is in fact theoretically possible, and you cant produce even the tiniest scintilla of evidence that it didnt happen I rest my case. quot See also, Argument from Ignorance. The Shopping Hungry Fallacy . A fallacy of pathos, a variety of Playing on Emotions, making stupid but important decisions (or being prompted, manipulated or forced to quotfreelyquot take public or private decisions that may be later regretted but are difficult to reverse) quotin the heat of the moment, quot when under the influence of strong emotion (hunger, fear, lust, anger, sadness, regret, fatigue, even joy, love or happiness). Z. B. Trevor Noah, current (2016) host of the Daily Show on American television attributes approval of draconian measures of the Patriot Act and the creation of the U. S. Department of Homeland Security to Americas quotshopping hungryquot immediately after 9/11. See also quotWe Have to Do Something. quot The Simpletons Fallacy: (Or, The Good Simpleton Fallacy): A corrupt fallacy of logos, described in an undated quote from science writer Isaac Asimov as quot T he false notion that democracy means that my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge. quot The name of this fallacy is borrowed from Walter M. Miller Jr. s classic (1960) post-apocalyptic novel, A Canticle for Leibowitz . in which in the centuries after a nuclear holocaust knowledge and learning are so despised that quotGood Simpletonquot becomes the standard form of interpersonal salutation. This fallacy is alleged to have had a great deal to do with the outcome of the 2016 US presidential election. See also quotJust Plain Folks, quot and the quotPlain Truth Fallacy. quot The name quotSimpletons Fallacyquot has also been used to refer to a deceptive technique of argumentation, feigning ignorance, particularly in order to get ones opponent to admit to, explain or overexplain something s/he would rather not discuss. Z. B. quotI see here that you have a past conviction for Criminal Sodomy. I may be a poor, naive simpleton but Im not quite sure what that fancy lawyer-talk means in plain English. Please explain to the jury what exactly it was you did that got you convicted. quot The Slippery Slope (also, the Domino Theory): The common fallacy that quotone thing inevitably leads to another. quot E. g. quotIf you two go and drink coffee together one thing will lead to another and next thing you know youll be pregnant and end up spending your life on welfare living in the Projects, quot or quotIf we close Gitmo one thing will lead to another and before you know it armed terrorists will be strolling through our church doors with suicide belts on during the 10:30 a. m servicequot The Snow Job (also Information Bias): The fallacy of proving a claim by overwhelming an audience with mountains of true but marginally-relevant facts, numbers, documents, graphs and statistics that look extremely impressive but which they cannot be expected to understand or evaluate. This is a corrupted argument from logos. See also, quotLying with Statistics. quot The opposite of this fallacy is the Plain Truth Fallacy. The Soldiers Honor Fallacy . The ancient fallacy that all who wore a uniform, fought hard and followed orders are worthy of some special honor or glory or are even quotheroes, quot whether they fought for freedom or fought to defend slavery, marched under Grant or Lee, Hitler, Stalin, Eisenhower or McArthur, fought to defend their homes, fought for oil or to spread empire, or even fought against and killed U. S. soldiers. A corrupt argument from ethos (that of a soldier), closely related to the quotFinish the Jobquot fallacy (quotSure, he died for a lie, but he deserves honor because he followed orders and did his job to the endquot). See also quotHeroes All. quot This fallacy was recognized and decisively refuted at the Nuremburg Trials after World War II but remains powerful to this day nonetheless. See also quotBlind Loyalty. quot Related is the State Actor Fallacy . that those who fight and die for a country (America, Russia, Iran, the Third Reich, etc.) are worthy of honor or at least pardonable while those who fight for a non-state actor (abolitionists, guerrillas, freedom-fighters, jihadis) are not and remain quotterroristsquot no matter how noble or vile their cause, until or unless they are adopted by a state after the fact. Star Powe r (also Testimonial, Questionable Authority, Faulty Use of Authority, Eminence-based Practice): In academia, a corrupt argument from ethos in which arguments, standpoints and themes of academic discourse are granted fame and validity or condemned to obscurity solely by whoever the reigning quotstarsquot of the discipline are at the moment. Z. B. quotNetwork Theory has been thoroughly criticized and is so last-week. This week everyones into Safe Spaces, Trigger Warnings, and Pierces Theory of Microaggressions. Get with the program. quot (See also, the Bandwagon.) At the popular level this also refers to a corrupt argument from ethos in which popular support for a standpoint or product is established by a well-known or respected figure (e. g. a star athlete or entertainer) who is not an expert and who may have been well paid to make the endorsement (e. g. Olympic gold-medal pole-vaulter Fulano de Tal uses Quick Flush Internet-shouldnt youquot Or, quotMy favorite rock star warns that vaccinations spread cooties, so Im not vaccinating my kidsquot ). Includes other false, meaningless or paid means of associating oneself or ones product or standpoint with the ethos of a famous person or event (e. g. Try Salsa Cabria, the official taco sauce of the Winter Olympics). The Straw Man (also quotThe Straw Personquot quotquotThe Straw Figurequot): The fallacy of setting up a phony, weak, extreme or ridiculous parody of an opponents argument and then proceeding to knock it down or reduce it to absurdity with a rhetorical wave of the hand. Z. B. quotVegetarians say animals have feelings like you and me. Ever seen a cow laugh at a Shakespeare comedy Vegetarianism is nonsensequot Or, quotPro-choicers hate babiesquot Or, quotPro-lifers hate women and want them to spend their lives barefoot, pregnant and chained to the kitchen stovequot This fallacy is only too common in American politics and popular discourse. The Taboo . The fallacy of unilaterally declaring certain arguments, standpoints or actions quotsacrosanctquot and not open to discussion, or arbitrarily taking some emotional tones, logical standpoints or options quotoff the tablequot beforehand. (E. g. quot quotNo, lets no t discuss my sexuality, quot quotDont bring my drinking into this, quot or quotBefore we start, you need to know I wont allow you to play the race card or allow you to attack my arguments by claiming Thats just what Hitler would sayquot) Also applies to discounting or rejecting certain arguments and evidence out of hand because they are quotagainst the Biblequot or other sacred doctrine (See also the A Priori Argument). This fallacy occasionally degenerates into a separate, distracting argument over who gets to define the parameters, tone and taboos of the main argument, though at this point reasoned discourse most often breaks down and the entire affair becomes a naked Argumentun ad Baculum. See also, MYOB, and Tone Policing. Theyre All Crooks . The contemporary fallacy of refusing to get involved in public politics because all politicians and politics are allegedly corrupt, ignoring the fact that if this is so in a democratic country it is precisely because quotdecentquot people like you and I refuse to get involved, leaving the field open to the quotcrooksquot by default. An example of Circular Reasoning. Theyre Not Like Us (also, Stereotyping, Xenophobia. Ethnic Prejudice, Othering): A badly corrupted, discriminatory argument from ethos where facts, arguments, experiences or objections are arbitrarily disregarded, ignored or put down without serious consideration because those involved quotare not like us, quot or quotdont think like us. quot E. g. quotIts OK for Mexicans to earn a buck an hour in the maquiladoras. If it happened here Id call it brutal exploitation and daylight robbery but south of the border, down Mexico way theyre not at all like us. quot Or, quotYou claim that life must be really terrible over there for terrorists to ever think of blowing themselves up with suicide vests just to make a point, but always remember that theyre different from us. They dont think about life and death the same way we do. quot A vicious variety of the Ad Hominem Fallacy, most often applied to non-white or non-Christian populations. A variation of this fallacy is the quotSpeakeequot Fallacy (quotYou speakee da Englishquot), in which an opponents arguments are mocked, ridiculed and dismissed solely because of the speakers alleged or real accent, dialect, or lack of fluency in standard English, e. g. quotHe told me Vee vorkers need to form a younion but I told him to come back when he learns to speak proper English. quot A dangerous, extreme example of quotTheyre Not Like Usquot is Dehumanization, where opponents are dismissed as mere cockroaches, lice, apes, monkeys, rats, weasels or bloodsucking parasites who have no right to speak at all and probably should be quotsquashed like bugs. quot This fallacy is the quotlogicquot behind genocide and gas ovens. See also quotName Callingquot and quotOlfactory Rhetoric. quot The opposite of this fallacy is the quotPollyanna Principlequot above. The quotThousand Flowersquot Fallacy (also, quotTake names and kick butt. quot): A sophisticated quotArgumentum ad Baculumquot in which free and open discussion and quotbrainstormingquot is temporarily allowed and encouraged (even demanded ) not in order to hear and consider opposing views, but rather to quotsmoke out, quot identify and later punish, fire or liquidate dissenters. The name comes from the Thousand Flowers Period in Chinese history when Communist leader Chairman Mao Tse Tung applied this policy with deadly effect. Throwing Good Money After Bad (also, quotSunk Cost Fallacyquot): In his book, Logically Fallacious (2015), Author Bo Bennett describes this fallacy as follows: quotReasoning that further investment is warranted on the fact that the resources already invested will be lost otherwise, not taking into consideration the overall losses involved in the further investment. quot In other words, risking additional money to quotsavequot an earlier, losing investment, ignoring the old axiom that quotDoing the same thing and expecting different results is the definition of insanity. quot E. g. quotI cant stop betting now because I already bet the rent and lost, and I need to win it back or my wife will kill mequot See also Argument from Inertia. TINA (There Is No Alternative. Also quotThats an order, quot quotGet over it, quot quotSuck it up, quot quotIt is what it is, quot quotActions/Elections have consequences, quot or the quotFait Accompliquot): A very common contemporary extension of the either/or fallacy in which someone in power quashes critical thought by announcing that there is no realistic alternative to a given standpoint, status or action, arbitrarily ruling any and all other options out of bounds, or announcing that a decision has been made and any further discussion is insubordination, disloyalty, disobedience or simply a waste of precious time when theres a job to be done. (See also, quotTabooquot quotFinish the Job. quot) Often a variety of the Argumentum ad Baculum. See also Appeal to Closure. Tone Policing. A corrupt argument from pathos and delivery, the fallacy of judging the validity of an argument primarily by its emotional tone of delivery, ignoring the reality that a valid fact or argument remains valid whether it is offered calmly and deliberatively or is shouted in a quotshrillquot or even quothystericalquot tone, whether calmly stated in professional, academic language or screamed through a bull-horn and peppered with vulgarity. Conversely, a highly urgent emotional matter is still urgent even if argued coldly and rationally. This fallacy creates a false dichotomy between reason and emotion and thus implicitly favors those who are not personally involved or emotionally invested in an argument, e. g. quotI know youre upset, but I wont discuss it until you calm down, quot or quotId believe what you write were it not for your adolescent use of exclamation points throughout the text. quot Or alternately, quotYou seem to be way too calm about the death of your spouse. Youre under arrest for homicide. You have the right to remain silent. quot Tone Policing is frequent in contemporary discourse of power, particularly in response to discourse of protest. Transfer . (also, Name Dropping) A corrupt argument from ethos, falsely associating a famous or respected person, place or thing with an unrelated standpoint (e. g. putting a picture of the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. on an advertisement for mattresses, using Genghis Khan, a Mongol who hated Chinese, as the name of a Chinese restaurant, or using the Texas flag to sell cars or pickups that were made in Detroit, Kansas City or Kyoto). This fallacy is common in contemporary academia in the form of using a profusion of scholarly-looking citations from respected authorities to lend a false gravitas to otherwise specious ideas or text. See also quotStar Power. quot Tu Quoque (quotYou Do it Tooquot also, Two Wrongs Make a Right): A corrupt argument from ethos, the fallacy of defending a shaky or false standpoint or excusing ones own bad action by pointing out that ones opponents acts, ideology or personal character are also open to question, or are perhaps even worse than ones own. Z. B. quotSure, we may have tortured prisoners and killed kids with drones, but we dont cut off heads off like they doquot Or, quotYou cant stand there and accuse me of corruption You guys are all into politics and you know what you have to do to get reelectedquot Related to the Red Herring and to the Ad Hominem Argument. Two Truths ( also, Compartmentalization Epistemically Closed Systems): A fallacy of logos and ethos, first formally described in medieval times but still common today, holding that there exists one quottruthquot in one given system (e. g. science, work or school) and simultaneously a different, directly contradictory but equally true quottruthquot in a different epistemic system, context or discourse community (e. g. religion or home). This can lead to a situation of stable cognitive dissonance where, as UC Irvine scholar Dr. Carter T. Butts describes it (2016), quotI know but dont believe, quot making rational discussion difficult or impossible. Venting (also, Letting off Steam Loose Lips) : In the Venting fallacy a person argues that her/his words are or ought to be exempt from criticism or consequence because s/he was quotonly venting, quot even though this very admission implies that the one quotventingquot was, at long last, freely expressing his/her true, heartfelt and uncensored opinion about the matter in question. This same fallacy applies to minimizing, denying the significance of or excusing other forms of frank, unguarded or uninhibited offensive expression as mere quot Locker-room Talk, quot quot Alpha-male Speech quot or nothing but cute, adorable quot Bad-boy Talk. quot See also, the Affective Fallacy. We Have to Do Something . (also, the Placebo Effect quotSecurity Theaterquot): The dangerous contemporary fallacy that when quotPeople are scared / People are angry / People are fed up / People are hurting / People want changequot it becomes necessary to do something, anything . at once even if it is an overreaction, is a completely ineffective, inert placebo, or actually makes the situation worse, rather than quotjust sitting there doing nothing. quot (E. g. quotBanning air passengers from carrying ham sandwiches onto the plane and making parents take off their newborn infants tiny pink baby-shoes probably does nothing to deter potential hijackers, but people are scared and we have to do something to respond to this crisisquot) This is a badly corrupted argument from pathos. (See also quotScare Tactic. quot) Where theres Smoke, theres Fire (also Hasty Conclusion Jumping to a Conclusion): The dangerous fallacy of drawing a snap conclusion and/or taking action without sufficient evidence. Z. B. Captain The guy sitting next to me in coach has a dark skin and is reading a book in some funny language all full of weird squiggles like and . It must be Arabic Get him off the plane before he blows us all to kingdom come A variety of the Just in Case fallacy. The opposite of this fallacy is the quotParalysis of Analysis. quotThe Wisdom of the Crowd (also, The Magic of the Market the Wikipedia Fallacy): A very common contemporary fallacy that individuals may be wrong but quotthe crowdquot or quotthe marketquot is infallible, ignoring historic examples like witch-burning, lynching, and the market crash of 2008. This fallacy is why most colleges and universities ban students from using Wikipedia as a serious reference work. The Worst-Case Fallacy (also, quotJust in casequot quotWe cant afford to take chances. quot): A pessimistic fallacy by which ones reasoning is based on an improbable, far-fetched or even completely imaginary worst-case scenario rather than on reality. This plays on pathos (fear) rather than reason. Z. B. quotWhat if armed terrorists were to attack your county grain elevator tomorrow morning at dawn Are you ready to fight back Better stock up on assault rifles and ammunition today, just in casequot The opposite of this is the Positive Thinking Fallacy. The Worst Case Negates the Bad (also, Be Grateful for What Youve Got): The logical fallacy that a bad situation stops being so bad because it could be far worse, or because someone, somewhere has it even worse. Z. B. quotI cried because I had no shoes, until I saw someone who had no feet. quot Or, quotYoure protesting because you earn only 7.25 an hour You could just as easily be out on the street I happen to know there are people in Uttar Pradesh who are doing the very same work youre doing for one tenth of what youre making, and theyre pathetically glad just to have work at all. You need to shut up, put down that picket sign, get back to work and thank us each and every day for giving you a jobquot Zero Tolerance (also, Zero Risk Bias, Broken Windows Policing, Disproportionate Response, Even One is Too Many, Judenrein): The contemporary fallacy of declaring an quotemergencyquot and promising to devote unlimited resources to stamp out a limited, insignificant or even nonexistent problem. Z. B. quotI just read about an actual case of cannibalism somewhere in this country. Thats disgusting, and even one case is way, way too many We need a Federal Taskforce against Cannibalism with a million-dollar budget and offices in every state, a national SCAN program in all the grade schools (Stop Cannibalism in America Now), and an automatic double death penalty for cannibals in other words, zero tolerance for cannibalism in this countryquot This is a corrupt and cynical argument from pathos, almost always politically driven, a particularly sinister variety of the quotWe Have to do Somethingquot fallacy. See also, quotPlaying on Emotions, quot quotRed Herring, quot and also the quotBig Lie Technique. quot OW 7/06 with thanks to the late Susan Spence. Latest revision 12/16, with special thanks to Business Insider. to Bradley Steffens. to Lara Bhasin, Danelle M. Pecht, Marc Lawson, to Dr. William Lorimer, Dr. Carter T. Butts, Dr. Bo Bennett. and to the all other readers who suggested corrections, additions and clarifications. This is a living document, so any suggestions or critiques are welcome. Please copy, mirror and share freely. The incredibly easy, completely free QampA platform Piazza is designed to connect students, TAs, and professors so every student can get the help they need when they need it. Today, hundreds of thousands of students across hundreds of campuses are using Piazza for their classes. It warms me to think I started something that is impacting the way students learn and the way instructors teach. I sincerely hope Piazza enhances your experience as a student, as a TA, and as a professor. mdash Pooja Nath Sankar, Piazza Founder amp CEO Copyright 169 2014 Piazza Technologies All Rights Reserved Our terms changed on December 6, 2016. Please review the new Piazza Terms of Service. , , 180 . . - , 45 . . 4 104. The Hour of Code map only shows the first 200,000 registered events. All registered events with a valid address can be viewed on the events page. 40 100 , 70 , 200 . ,. , , , , - - , , , . , 1- , . . , 400 200000 . . 2016 5-11 , . (9 1906). . ,. , - 21 . . . . , 5 . Code. org. ,. Microsoft, Apple, Amazon, Boys and Girls Clubs of America College Board. . Aufrechtzuerhalten. . , - . ,. . Code. org . Code. org . - Code. org code. org/learn . ,. . , , , - , - . Aufrechtzuerhalten. . . . . . ,. Aufrechtzuerhalten. . . . Ukraine. - - . . . ,. Aufrechtzuerhalten. ,. . ,. ,. . . . , JavaScript . code. org/learn. . 30 , JavaScript, Khan Academy CodeHS. Scratch, , iPad, Scratch . ScratchJR iPad. Code. org/learn. , iPad - Code. org, Tynker, Lightbot, CodeSpark. . , , , . , , . . ,. , , . , , . , , 48 . . , , , - , , . , - , , , - , , , . , , - , , , ( ). , , , , . , , , . , , - , , . , , . - . . . . .
No comments:
Post a Comment