How to recognize false arguments and not get caught on the hook
Books / / December 19, 2019
What is the argument
Why is it important to be able to think logically? Before answering this question, we shall understand with another concept - the statement. For example, the statement about the practice of keeping animals as pets:
Keep animals at home is wrong.
Adoption - a statement of fact or opinion, not backed by evidence or justification. In itself it is nothing more than information transmitted. On the contrary, the argument - something more valuable.
Consider the following argument against detention pets:
Animals can not be turned into pets, as it deprives them of their freedom and the possibility to lead a decent life. All living beings are worthy of freedom.
This time not only the statement in front of us about what kind of situation is seen speaking, but also a logical chain, designed to substantiate it. Trying to give a rationale conclusion is very important.
When someone says that "to keep animals at home is wrong," we know there is no place, why he thinks so. Perhaps it has to do so much good reason that our lives will change, we barely hear her. Or is he just repeats the words of his mother? We do not know. Once this person starts to argue their position, opening up before us some very interesting possibilities. We can:
- a better understanding of his view of the situation;
- realize we agree with his logic or not;
- compare the arguments and see whether there is more conclusive in favor of a different point of view;
- find out whether the speaker does not lose important data or ideas;
- argue with him and try him to convince - or change their own point of view.
Arguments, other people force you to agree with certain deductions and for this purpose show a sequence of assumptions that (in their view) it supports. Hence the working definition of an argument in the context of critical thinking.
The argument - it is an attempt at persuasion by means of establishing the truth of logic.
We can distinguish two key elements:
- you offer a logical chain, which is ...
- ... is designed to make you take a withdrawal.
Conclusion - is the result of reasoning, the finish, which brings to everything else. The output of one variable capable of becoming a starting point to another, but each argument may be only one final output. […]
What are false arguments
Look how the false argument. Have you noticed that there is not so?
Everyone with whom I spoke believe that the president copes with its responsibilities. Enough grumbling, it's time to admit that it is quite appropriate for the leader of our country!
Even if you instinctively feel that this line of reasoning is not all is well, difficult to detect the defectBecause it is implicit. Here there is unvoiced assumption, and rub it in it - that has not been said or acknowledged publicly. If you enter this premise, the problem becomes apparent.
Everyone with whom I spoke believe that the president copes with its responsibilities. Collective wisdom of the people interviewed me enough to prove the truth. Enough already grumbling, it's time to admit that it is quite appropriate for the leader of our country!
Note unspoken premise - that the opinion of the majority is sufficient for the recognition of the truth - it is common and not private. This kind of argument is called false appeal to popularity. Once we found it, it becomes obvious that it is insufficient basis for the withdrawal (unless it is proved that the speaker carefully interviewed huge number of different people and their collective opinion of the validity of certificates of competency President). Compare this logical error with another false approach to the same issue.
Both the person with whom I spoke believe that the president copes with its responsibilities. I talked with Bert and Ernie, and they are never wrong. Enough already grumbling, it's time to admit that it is quite appropriate for the leader of our country!
In this case, reliance on supposedly infallible view of two people creates appealing to an imaginary authority. If people, which is referred to, are not experts in this field, then this argument is very weak. If Bert and Ernie - prominent political analysts at the national level, their opinion gives reason to agree with the conclusion. Otherwise we face the argument, which claims to certainty in the matter, in which it is possible unless the weak rationale, for example:
Both people with whom I spoke believe that the president copes with its responsibilities. It's Bert and Ernie, and they are well-informed. It can be assumed that they are somewhat right; therefore, you have reason to at least partially revise their attitude.
This is not a false argument because it does not produce poorly backed by logical arguments the subjective opinion of the absolute truth. However, it gives the illusion of indisputable logic of erroneous conviction. Many false inferences weak inductive argument is issued for the powerful deductive, which in turn simplifies the picture of the world, for their own reassurance.
Any false conclusion relies on a detectable hidden unsubstantiated premise. This is a generalization, claiming the role of convincing confirmation output (at best hardly backed by), or the result of a misunderstanding of deductive logic. Consider two typical false argument and try to find in all of them groundless hidden premise.
- Opposition leader claims that morality in our country falls, when this moralistka catch on an affair with a man 20 years younger than her. So that all its statements worthless!
- In the experiment, we observed that the temperature rise in the first room led to a decrease in the effectiveness of the band number 1. On this basis, we argue that the decline in the effectiveness of the experimental group members number 2 should have been caused by an increase in temperature in the second room.
In the first example introduces the premise: "If someone commits an act that runs counter to his claims, then these assertions are wrong." Obviously, this is not the case. Hypocrisy - an occasion to reflect on the identity of the person, but the presence of this feature does not moot everything that he says.
The premise of the second example, "Because the temperature rise in one case of deteriorated, it is only possible explanation deterioration results in all other cases". This is wrong, because the effectiveness may be reduced for many other reasons: the false premise indicates a misunderstanding of logic.
It is difficult to point to a specific problem in the chain of reasoning or to convince others that there is a problem with the logic. Effectively to clarify the situation allows method of comparable examples - construction of parallel arguments with exactly the same logic, but on a completely different topic reasoning.
Let's go back to the first example in this chapter appeals to popular opinion.
Everyone with whom I spoke believe that the president copes with its responsibilities. Enough already grumbling, it's time to admit that it is quite appropriate for the leader of our country!
You can check the legality of the reasoning in the comparable example - not even one, but on three.
- In the yard in 1066, and everyone with whom I spoke believe that the earth is flat. Enough already grumbling, it's time to admit that it's true!
- None of those with whom I spoke, does not know what is "the art of Terpsichore." Clever enough already, it's time to admit that it is a meaningless phrase!
- Everyone in this room say that two plus two equals five. Enough already argue, the way it is!
As you certainly know, two plus two equals four, the Earth is not flat, and the art of Terpsichore - is a dance. In this case, examples having the same shape as that of the analyzed argument detected the groundlessness of its fundamental conditions, helping to see the apparent failure of convincing reasoning.
To get acquainted with the other tools of thinking and learn to distinguish false arguments, read the book "Critical thinking".
To buy a book
see also🧐
- How to win in a dispute and understand when to retreat
- True or false: how to recognize deception interlocutor
- How to prove to everybody that the Earth is round