Logical Fallacies

Logical Fallacies

Introduction

The fallacies and false arguments are errors that violate the rules of good behavior act argumentative inferences are invalid, but whose shape reminds of valid arguments. These are matters that have no relation to the thesis put under discussion and are used in everyday arguments: insult someone, threaten, treat incompetent; may serve also to force the party to accept the validity of a thesis inconsistent (LaBossiere, 2010). Some fallacies affect linguistic aspect itself, as ambiguity, unintelligibility of statements, absence of meaning behind seemingly meaningful statements, others are based on the manipulation of the facts.

Discussion

Ad Hominem Fallacy

The argumentum ad hominem, a Latin word meaning evidence for humans, is a rhetorical figure and refers to a mode of argument in a debate instead of the actual debate topic of debate opponent as a person is made the object of reasoning (Downes, n.d.). This usually happens in a degrading and offensive manner and aims to draw the integrity and competence of the enemy in doubt and at the same time to strengthen their own position. Whether an idea is true or false does not depend on the person uttering them. Who wants to refute the objectivism that has to do with the weapons of logic and reason, and not by logical insults to its representatives?

Ad hominem fallacy is by far the most frequent one. On the basis of an argument it is refused on irrelevant facts on the speaker or on the person who is given a certain location. Typically, this error involves two phases. First, it made an attack on the character or actions of the person making the claim. Then, this attack is used as evidence against the claim that the person in question is doing (Walton, 1987). For example, John says that it is necessary in the factory where they work to improve the safety devices to ensure the safety of the workers, since some machines are entirely lacking. Mario says that John in the 60s was arrested for resisting a public officer. So do not be taken into account, neither he nor his request. Where the point instead is to verify if the safety devices are actually absent or otherwise necessary or initiate a debate concerning risk analysis.

The ad hominem fallacy applied to a writer, usually an artist, a philosopher, attempt to discredit the work of the "quality" of man, say because the man has committed a sin or crime. How could I tell the truth a criminal! Basically, a fallacy is an assertion apparently proclaims a truth, but subtly hidden in falsehood. I say subtly because if a fallacy is effective appears as truth, otherwise resplendent obviously false. In the present case, the fallacy of ad hominem attack is "the man" and not what "man" says, this is what happens when someone denigrates rather than refute the words, speech (Downes, n.d.)..

Insults and personal attacks irrelevant to the question fall into the category of ad hominem abusive, are related to the red herring ...