Fallacies in Critical Thinking

I have done a good deal of talking about critical thinking in class. Here is the list I promised! Critical Thinking has to do with premises and conclusions. The fallacies presented below show issues in reasoning, in which arguments are stated, but their conclusions do not logically follow. These are solid, working definitions of intellectually sticky situations. The list has been very helpful to me.

Fallacies:
Vagueness- just plain old not specific enough

Ambiguity- when something can have more than one meaning

Semantic ambiguity- having to do with words

Syntactic ambiguity- having to do with structure
    Ex. The girl was on the chair wearing the bikini

Grouping ambiguity- when you can’t tell if something is referring to a group or an individual
    Ex. Secretaries make more money than physicians do.

Fallacy of division - cops are good guys, therefore greg’s a good guy

Fallacy of composition- elise can’t drive, therefore women can’t drive

Euphemism- making something sound better than it is
    Ex. saying someone dropped the ball rather than burned down the house
Dysphemism- making something sound worse than it is
    Ex. Calling someone a know-it-all rather than a good student

Rhetorical definitions- use emotively charged language to express or elicit an attitude about something

Rhetorical explanations- Not really an explanation. these are similar to rhetorical defs.
    Ex. He didn’t win the lottery because he’s an asshole

Stereotype- thought or image about  a group of people based on little or no evidence
    Ex. Blondes are dumb.

Innuendo- significant mention, inferring, emotionally inflammatory suggestions

Loaded questions- questions that you can’t answer objectively
    Ex. Have you stopped beating your wife?

Weaselers: Weasling your way our of giving proof for something:
  "it has not been 100% scientifically proven that, perhaps, possibly, maybe"

Downplaying- adding "merely", "only," "just" to undermine something or someone

Horselaugh/ridicule/sarcasm - not dealing with an issue, but making fun of it instead

Hyperbole- gross over exaggeration

Proof surrogates- statements pretending to have authority without actually having any.
    Ex. “research has shown that…”

Rhetorical analogy- a comparison of two things or a likening of one thing to another in order to make one of them appear better or worse.
    Ex. Social security is a ponzi scheme

Argument from outrage- getting people pissed off about something rather than dealing with the issue.

Scapegoat- blaming one person or group for everything, even though they are partially or not at all responsible. The kkk is an example

Scare tactics- insurance companies use these. They make you believe that if you don’t conclude the same thing as them, you’ll die

Argument by force- use of threats
ex. Blackmailing

Argument from pitty- hiring someone because you feel sorry for them

Apple polishing- using flattery to get people to join you in your conclusion

Guilt tripping- making someone feel bad instead of reasoning.
    Ex. If you don’t do this then it’ll be your fault that granny dies

Wishful thinking- hopping instead of reasoning
    Ex. I hope my car doesn’t explode

Peer pressure argument- why don’t you drink- group think fallacy

Nationalism

Rationalizing- using a false pretext to satisfy our own desires or interests

Argument from popularity- believing something because some or most people do

Argument from common practice- ex. I shouldn’t get a ticket because everyone else speeds too

Argument  from tradition- that’s how it’s always been done

Subjectivist fallacy- the idea that something is true just because I think it is

Relativist fallacy- I don’t believe in immolation but it’s ok for other people to because they aren’t me.

Two wrongs make a right

Red herring/smoke screen

Ad hominem attack-using the qualities of a person rather than the qualities of their arguments

personal attack ad hominem

Inconsistency ad hominem- more often self contradiction

Circumstantial ad hominem- he doesn’t like sex, he’s a priest

Genetic fallacy- blanket category when we refute a claim on the basis of it’s origin or its history

Straw man- not representing your opponents argument correctly, so you can knock it down

False dilemma- having to choose between options that are given, when things are being left out

Perfectionist fallacy- has to do with a plan or policy, if the policy will not meet the goals as well as we’d like them me then we should reject it entirely.

Line-drawing fallacy- the fallacy of insisting that a line must be drawn at some precise point when in fact it is not necessary that such a precise line be drawn

Slippery slope- when the person states that such and such a thing will lead to this… if we stop eating meat the cows will take over

Misplacing the burden of proof-self explanatory

Appeal to ignorance- saying no one knows if there’s a god, so my claim is as good as anyone else’s

Begging the question- structural, has to do with with premises and conclusion, circular reasoning - restating without support  or if the premise = the conclusion

Suppression of evidence

Self contradiction- have to verbatim say something and then say its contrary to self-contradict.

Equivocation- using a word in two ways

Apeal to authority- using stars rather than professionals to sell products

Guilt by association- the university of cal once employed the unibomer- vis a vis they are evil argument

Missing the point- non sequitur - has to do with structural, the conclusion does not follow from the premises

Evading the issue- politicians do that, they answer a question with something that has nothing to do with it.

Suppression of evidence- some piece of evidence that would alter the import of the argument is left out or ignored.

All of these definitions come from my class (professor's notes and lecture), myself and the text, Critical Thinking, 9th Edition by Moore and Parker.