Logical fallacies

The blog post series ‘Better decision making’ is about learning to recognize, in ourselves and others, how emotions and group pressure can impede rational decision making and lead to short-sightedness. Such phenomena can be present in our daily lives, at social gatherings in school, in business meetings, talk shows or news reporting. The modified excerpt below is taken from a longer article by Karla Hesterberg on HubSpot, as well as logicalfallacies.org. Image by drobotdean.

Logical fallacies are errors in reasoning or argumentation that can undermine the validity of an argument. Practiced intentional or unintentional, they are often used to mislead or distract from the truth, or to win an argument by appealing to emotions rather than reason. Logical fallacies can be difficult to detect, as they often involve seemingly reasonable arguments that, upon closer examination, reveal underlying flaws. It’s important to be aware of these fallacies in order to critically evaluate arguments and avoid being misled.

The Ad Hominem Fallacy

An ad hominem fallacy occurs when someone attacks you personally rather than using logic to refute your argument. Instead they’ll attack physical appearance, personal traits, or other irrelevant characteristics to criticize the other’s point of view. For example, in a political debate a mistake from the past is brought up to cast a politician in a bad light, without actually addressing the arguments made.

The Appeal to Authority Fallacy

While appeals to authority are by no means always fallacious, they can quickly become dangerous when you rely too heavily on the opinion of a single person. Getting an authority figure to back your proposition can be a powerful addition to an existing argument, but it can’t be the pillar your entire argument rests on. Just because someone in a position of power believes something to be true, doesn’t make it true. For example, a military expert who doesn’t take into account both sides of a story in a war situation.

The Bandwagon Fallacy

Just because a significant population of people believe a proposition is true, doesn’t automatically make it true. Popularity alone is not enough to validate an argument, though it’s often used as a standalone justification of validity. Arguments in this style don’t take into account whether or not the population validating the argument is actually qualified to do so, or if contrary evidence exists. For example, when numerous different news outlets over a longer period of time repeat the same negative stance towards a tech entrepreneur, without addressing counter-arguments.

The Hasty Generalization Fallacy

This fallacy occurs when someone draws expansive conclusions based on inadequate or insufficient evidence. In other words, they jump to conclusions about the validity of a proposition with some — but not enough — evidence to back it up, and overlook potential counterarguments. For example, someone bases their opinion solely on their own experience without taking into account experiences of the wider population.

The Straw Man Fallacy

This fallacy occurs when your opponent over-simplifies or misrepresents your argument (i.e., setting up a “straw man”) to make it easier to attack or refute. Instead of fully addressing your actual argument, speakers relying on this fallacy present a superficially similar — but ultimately not equal — version of your real stance, helping them create the illusion of easily defeating you. For example, a nuanced take on migration is reduced to a racism argument.

The False Dilemma Fallacy

This common fallacy misleads by presenting complex issues in terms of two inherently opposed sides. Instead of acknowledging that most (if not all) issues can be thought of on a spectrum of possibilities and stances, the false dilemma fallacy asserts that there are only two mutually exclusive outcomes.This fallacy is particularly problematic because it can lend false credence to extreme stances, ignoring opportunities for compromise or chances to re-frame the issue in a new way. For example, critics of a certain climate policy are automatically casted as not being open to green initiatives at all.

10 more logical fallacies can be read about in the original article by Karla Hesterberg on HubSpot.

IWTW recommends the social media platform X as a tool to become aware of logical fallacies. For example:

  • ‘Follow’ both proponents and opponents regarding major issues such as climate, migration and wars around the world.
  • Read comments below tweets.
  • Judge the quality of different arguments.

RELATED POSTS

Assessing the quality of arguments

We need to become aware of real versus misleading counter-arguments in order to facilitate high quality discussions and decisions.

Cognitive biases

A cognitive bias is a systematic error that occurs when people process and interpret information about the world. This then impacts their decisions.