If you're honest, some of you might find yourself in here.
If you're not honest, some of you will never find yourself.
Still others may simply learn from these processes of argument so as
not to be misled.
---
---
Circular definition: is one that assumes a prior understanding
of the term being defined.

If one concept is defined by another, and the other is defined
by the first, we have a pair of circular definitions, somewhat
similar to a question-begging argument: neither offers us
enlightenment
about the thing we wanted to be enlightened about.
==

Circular reasoning: is the practice of assuming something,
in order to prove the very thing that you assumed.

Circular logic: If the premises are related to the conclusion in such
an intimate way that the speaker and listeners could not have less
reason to doubt the premise than they have to doubt the conclusion,
then the argument is worthless as a proof, even though the link
between premises and conclusion may have the most cast-iron rigor".
In other words, the argument fails to prove anything because it takes
for granted what it is supposed to prove.
==

Catch 22: describing a paradox in a law, regulation or practice
in which one is a victim regardless of the choice one makes.
==

Reification: is a fallacy of ambiguity, when an abstraction is
treated as if it represented a concrete, real event or physical
entity.

When people describe non-biological events (like a geyser) or
social institutions (like government) as alive, they are committing
a reification fallacy.
==

The lesser of two evils principle, also known simply as the lesser
evil,
is the idea that of two bad political choices, one isn't as bad as the
other,
and should be chosen over the one that is a greater threat.

Some people consider the lesser of two evils principle to be an
instance
of the false dichotomy fallacy.
==

False dichotomy: involves a situation in which two alternative
statements
are held to be the only possible options, when in reality there exist
one
or more other options which have not been considered.

"You are either with us or against us. You have refused to join our
cause,
therefore you must be working against our cause."
This argument is a false dilemma, because it denies the possibility
that there
is someone who has no interest or is unaware of that cause.

"Are you still beating your wife?" Whether the respondent answers yes
or no,
he will admit to having a wife, and having beaten her at some time in
the past.
==

Red herring: is an argument, given in reply, that does not address the
original issue.
Critically, a red herring is a deliberate attempt to change the
subject or divert the argument.

Rhetoric: is generally understood to be the art or technique
of persuasion through the use of oral or written language.

Logic: is the study of the principles and criteria of valid
inference and demonstration.
==
1.      The appeal to probability: because Hillary could be a lesbian,
she
must be a lesbian.

2.      Argument from fallacy: because Congressman Henry Waxman failed
to
prove on 20 January that Bush is a criminal, Bush cannot be a
criminal.

3.      Bare assertion fallacy: favored of Christian evangelicals -
the
Bible says it's true, and we say the Bible is infallible, therefore it
really must be infallible.

4.      Base rate fallacy: because a particular tool, such as polls,
didn't
work on one occasion, all polls are wrong.

5.      False dilemma: posing two options as the only alternatives,
even
though other options exist.

6.      Denying the correlative: pretending that non-existent options
exist. "Either Fido is a dog or he isn't a dog." "But what if he's
only a dog on weekends?"

7.      If by whiskey: trying to evade the rules by using emotionally-
loaded words to argue.

8.      Ignoratio elenchi: making a statement which is irrelevant to
the
issue at hand. For instance, refuting facts about Bush's crimes with
statements about Clinton and Monica.

9.      Red herring: an irrelevant, evasive response to an argument.

10.     Ad hominem: attacking your opponent instead of his argument.
Often
answered by the "tu quoque" argument, literally "you too!"

11.     Naturalistic fallacy: what is good in nature must be good in
human
ethics.

12.     Nirvana fallacy: if a proposal isn't a perfect solution to the
problem, it must be scrapped.  For example - because ObamaCare doesn't
cover everyone immediately, it is junk.

13.     Negative proof fallacy: because we can't prove it true, it
must be
false.

14.     Package-deal fallacy: because people who like low taxes often
oppose abortion, all opponents of high taxes oppose abortion.

15.     Affirming the consequent, or illicit conversion: backwards
logic.
If all al-Qaida terrorists were Muslims, then all Muslims must be
terrorists.

16.     Denying the antecedent: all al-Qaida terrorists are Muslims.
You're not al-Qaida, therefore you're not a Muslim.

17.     Proof by example: Muhammad Atta is a terrorist, therefore all
Muslims are terrorists.

18.     Syllogistical fallacies: there are so many they need their own
link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syllogisms

19.     Ad nauseam: literally, repeating a lie or bad logic over and
over
until your opponent throws up. Very popular among Republicans:
"Hillary's a socialist! Hillary's a socialist! Hillary's a socialist!
Hillary's a socialist! Hillary's a socialist! Hillary's a socialist!
Hillary's a socialist! Hillary's a socialist! Hillary's a socialist!
Hillary's a socialist! Hillary's a socialist! Hillary's a socialist!"

20.     Appeal to ridicule: dishonestly re-stating your opponent's
argument in a ridiculous way.

21.     Argument from ignorance: it must be true because it hasn't
been
proved false. Used often by Republicans to "prove" that Bush didn't
commit impeachable offenses.

22.     Begging the question: using circular logic, trying to prove
the
conclusion with the original assertion.

23.     Burden of proof: insisting that your opponent meet an
unnaturally
high level of proof. "I reject you link because I think the New York
Times is run by communists."

24.     Circular cause and consequence: claiming the result of a
phenomenon actually caused the phenomenon in the first place.

25.     Continuum fallacy: everything is relative.

26.     Equivocation: Do women need to worry about man-eating sharks?

27.     Fallacy of division: 747's can fly, 747 engines are part of
747's,
therefore 747's can fly.

28.     Ecological fallacy: if 70 percent of Alabama blacks support
Obama,
then if you pull a black guy off the street he will be an Obama fan.

29.     Fallacious question: a question which is based on a dishonest
premise.

30.     Fallacy of the single cause: assuming there is only one cause
for
a phenomenon.

31.     Historian's fallacy: assuming that people in the past saw the
world the same way we do.

32.     False attribution occurs: an advocate appeals to an
irrelevant,
unqualified, unidentified, biased or fabricated source in support of
an argument. For example, Republicans citing Fox, Drudge, Newsmax,
Worldnetdaily....

33.     Quoting out of context: speaks for itself.

34.     False compromise: the middle choice is always best. A biggie
with
Obama.

35.     Monte Carlo fallacy: the coin came up tails ten times in a
row, so
heads must be next.

36.     Loki's wager: if you can't define it, you can't discuss it.
Used
by evangelicals to refute arguments about "God".

37.     Post hoc ergo propter hoc: 911 happened after Bush's election,
therefore Bush caused 911.

38.     Proof by verbosity: burying your opponent in too many words,
even
if they don't really prove your premise.

39.     Regression fallacy: a number of phenomena consist of behaviour
that oscillates across a median - i.e. Hillary's national polls bounce
up and down but generally return to the 40-percent level. If she wins
Nevada and bounces from 37 up to 40, that doesn't mean Nevada got her
up there - she was probably going to bounce back anyway.

40.     Retrospective determinism: Martin Luther King was murdered by
racists...but it was bound to happen.

41.     Special pleading: using an emotional appeal to change the
rules of
the argument. I was poor longer than you, so my policies on poverty
and jobs must be better.

42.     The "sunk cost" fallacy: because we have invested effort into
something, we must stick with it no matter what, so the costs we sunk
into it aren't wasted. See "Iraq".

43.     Fallacy of accident: ignoring exceptions. Cutting people with
a
knife is a crime. Therefore surgeons are criminals. See also -- Dicto
simpliciter.

44.     Cherry picking: using only the data that supports your
position,
while ignoring the rest. For example - looking only at the polls which
show McCain leading Giuliani in Pennsylvania, and ignoring Rudy's good
polls.

45.     Converse accident: applying the exception to the rule. If we
let
rape victims have abortions, we're condoning it for everyone else.

46.     False analogies

47.     Misleading vividness: applying a specific example to an entire
pattern. Dang, Tejada got a hit off us - we should pitch around him
every time after this, or he'll hit it every time!

48.     Spotlight fallacy: individuals in a particular group will act
like
the most visible members of that group. Because Bjork wore a swan
costume to the Oscars, everyone in Iceland dresses that way. Brr!

49.     Thought-terminating cliché: ignoring facts which violate a
popular
cliché.

50.     Argumentum ad populum: everyone believes it so it must be
true.
Everyone believed Saddam had nukes in 2003.

51.     Association fallacy: you must be wrong because you hang out
with
people I don't like.

52.     Appeal to authority or tradition: the president (or my father)
says it, it must be true.

53.     Appeal to consequences: rejecting inconvenient facts.
Democrats
say Bush's tax cuts are a bad idea, but if we repeal them I must pay
more, so they must be wrong.

54.     Appeal to emotion: fear, hope, anger....

55.     Appeal to novelty: my idea is better because it's new.

56.     Appeal to poverty, or wealth. He must be honest because he's
poor.
She must be smart because she's rich.

57.     Poisoning the well:  smearing your target so that anything he
says
will be ignored.

58.     Straw man: misrepresenting the other guys' argument - putting
words in his mouth.

59.     Texas sharpshooter fallacy: implying a pattern that is
invalid.
For example - a Texas sharpshooter shoots a his barn with a rifle,
draws a circle around the bullet hole, and says "hit it!"

60.     Slippery slope: first we allow abortions, and then they will
demand that we kill retarded children and old people....

-- 
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/  
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. 
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Reply via email to