Article

Avoiding Logical Fallacies, Index

Below, I have listed a collection of fallacies that will serve three purposes; (1) my own further education, research, and understanding, (2) the education of others, and (3) a reference and foundation for further articles, entries, and topics in this blog.

As a father seeking to improve his own critical thought processes and as a decidedly novice skeptic I find it is becoming increasingly important to add structure to my existing repertoire of critical thinking and arguing skills. I know I tend to manage my own scientific reasoning, critical thought, and logical frameworks with some degree of confidence and ease — but formally I have yet to define these and understand them for what they are. This is important, especially if I expect to step in the role of educator to my kid and teach her those same skills.

A starting point for this nomenclature is a critical understanding of logical fallacies. What is a logical fallacy? Steven Novella, MD, of the New England Skeptical Society has shared online a pair of useful and insightful articles on the foundations of the logical argument and logical fallacies, How to Argue and The Skeptics Guide to the Universe Presents our Top 20 Logical Fallacies. He writes:

“Even when all of the premises of an argument are reliably true, the argument may still be invalid if the logic employed is not legitimate – a so called logical fallacy. The human brain is a marvelous machine with capabilities that, in some ways, still outperform the most powerful of super computers. Our brains, however, do not appear to have evolved specifically for precise logic. There are many common logical pitfalls that our minds tend to fall into, unless we are consciously aware of these pitfalls and make efforts to avoid them.” [1]

From Dr. Novella’s starting point I have decided to attempt my own exploration of logical fallacies. Below, I have listed (starting with the New England Skeptical Society’s top twenty, and hopefully adding more as — and if — I discover them) a collection of those fallacies that will (eventually) serve three purposes; (1) my own further education, research, and understanding, (2) the education of others, and (3) a reference and foundation for further articles, entries, and topics in this blog. And to proceed with this exploration I am going to fall back on the tried and tested (albeit composed of my own original details) fictitious example and quasi-supernatural thought experiment: skep/dad’s all-natural, one-size-fits-all, time traveling baseball cap, also known as The Chrono-Hat.

In each example the skep/kids and I attempt to debunk his claims — but we make our own logical mistakes.

  1. Ad hominem [ link ]
  2. Ad ignorantiam
  3. Argument from Authority [ link ]
  4. Argument from final Consequences
  5. Argument from Personal Incredulity
  6. Presuming Causation [ link ]
  7. Confusing currently unexplained with unexplainable
  8. False Continuum
  9. False Dichotomy
  10. Inconsistency
  11. The Moving Goalpost
  12. Non-Sequitur
  13. Post-hoc ergo propter hoc
  14. Reductio ad absurdum
  15. Slippery Slope
  16. Straw Man
  17. Special pleading, or ad-hoc reasoning
  18. Tautology
  19. Tu quoque
  20. Unstated Major Premise

[1] Novella, S How to Argue: A guide to examining the premises and logic of arguments - including a list of logical fallacies. New England Skeptical Society, http://www.theness.com/articles.asp?id=38, 2006

The SkepDad Blog is meant to casually reflect on questions surrounding parenting and raising kids to become critical thinkers by asking questions and examining parenting ideas with a skeptical eye for facts and science. Each article is one dad's personal opinion, backed (where relevant) by literature and published research, or otherwise based on personal experiences and insights. SkepDad welcomes balanced discussion, comments, and ideas.

December 10, 2007 by Brad
Filed as: Skeptical Mindsets

Popularity: 17%

Posts and Pages that might have similar content:


Avoiding Logical Fallacies: ad hominem >> The story so far: My pal, Victor Dillweed, has a time traveling baseball cap. He calls it his Chrono-Hat, and when he wears it he can travel backwards and forwards through time, visiting the far future and the ancient past.

Avoiding Logical Fallacies:
Argument from Authority >> The story so far: My pal, Victor Dillweed, has a time traveling baseball cap. He calls it his Chrono-Hat, and when he wears it he can travel backwards and forwards through time, visiting the far future and the ancient past.

Avoiding Logical Fallacies: Presuming Causation >> The story so far: My pal, Victor Dillweed, has a time traveling baseball cap. He calls it his Chrono-Hat, and when he wears it he can travel backwards and forwards through time, visiting the far future and the ancient past.

 
Tags: , , ,

Comments

2 Responses to “Avoiding Logical Fallacies, Index”

  1. Matt J. on February 3rd, 2008 10:45 am

    Despite what people of the “skeptical mindset” may have led you to believe, the best websites on fallacies are _not_ compiled by skeptics.

    But you don’t have to take my word for it. Take a look yourself at the following two examples and see how much more realistic, how much more logically coherent they are:

    1) http://fallacyfiles.org/

    2) http://www.iep.utm.edu/f/fallacy.htm

    Actually, the latter has the more accurate definitions, but the former has an impressive organization. Both provide definitions that skeptics and _some_ non-skeptics (the smart ones;) should agree on.


  2. Brad on February 3rd, 2008 3:34 pm

    Matt,

    Thanks for the links. Those are very useful.

    I suppose one of the shortcomings of the “skeptical collective” as it were is that many of us are really a mix of hobby scientists and armchair philosophers, myself included, seeking both an outlet and validation for our thinking. I’m not sure if having ready access to a worldwide audience is a good thing or not, but like anything we hang out our shingles and hope to get some feedback from both sides of the debate. I hope I don’t give the impression of bending blindly to the ideas of that so-called collective, but it has served as a ready starting point for some of these ideas. And you’re correct: most really good information is much more primary in source.

    Cheers.


Leave a Reply