Fallacy Dialogues Essay - 825 Words

Fallacy Dialogues (Essay Sample) Content: Name:Instructor:Course:Date: Fallacy dialogues A fallacy is basically an argument that may sound valid but it fundamentally lacks reason and logic thus considered invalid. There are usually two types of fallacies; formal fallacies and informal fallacies. These fallacies are then categorized according to what they affect in an argument: fallacies of relevance, fallacies of generalization or weak induction, fallacies of presumption and fallacies of language in a dialogue.Fallacies of relevanceFallacies of relevance usually try to persuade a person into accepting a proposition. However they lack enough supportive evidence for their claims. For example in the dialogue among Johns family over the TV:John: We should watch CNN news now! You had too much time watching movies.Son $ Daughter: But the movie isnt finished yetJohn: Did you forget who bought the TV? (Appeal to force. John threatens the children with his power to provide a TV for them)Wife: How can you be so mean an d cruel to your children? Remember God will is watching you (Appeal to emotion: his wife uses the argument even though with no concrete argument to try to make John let the children watch the TV by making him feel guilty for being mean to the children).John: But they are just children. They dont even know how important news is to adults (Ad hominem argument. This fallacy rejects a proposition depending with who proposes. John refuses to watch a movie on the basis that it is the children who have switched to the channel).Fallacies of generalization or weak inductionThis kind of fallacy makes conclusion about a phenomenon and assumes the conclusion on other or all similar instances. In this fallacy, the premises have a relation to the conclusion only that they are weakly truthful.John: Besides, this movie sort of has too much violence. They can destroy the non-violent nature of young children (Hasty Generalization: John attributes violence to all movies in a hasty way. He does not con sider it could be a different kind).Son: If you do not let us watch movies, we will be rebellious and sneak to watch them at our friends house and eventually become violent. (false cause. The son assumes the happening of violence if he is not let to do what he wishes. He tries to associate rebellion with the restriction from his father).Wife: John! You should listen to your son. If he becomes rebellious, he will start fighting every one of us and the family will break up (slippery slope. The wife in this case tries to appeal to the husband through a chain of impossible reactions between watching TV and family break up).Fallacies of presumptionThese kinds of fallacies do not provide adequate reason to believing the truth they purport in their conclusion. Mostly, they are as a result of other assumed truths connected with the argument in question. Improper reasoning results from the arguments imposing their conclusion in other similar phenomena.John: you see Most of these actors hold very high ranks in their martial arts classes. Therefore they are going to teach violence to my kids. (fallacy of accident: the fallacy of accident apply a universal premise that would affect the truth of the conclusion).Wife: I think most of the shows have a disclaimer not to try what they see at home. No child will try that after the warning. They know that they can easily break their limbs (converse accident. The fallacy of ...