That was Fallacious!

Definition:

Literally meaning "to the person," the ad hominem fallacy is committed when an argument is directed at an opponent instead of at the opponent's argument (McKissick, 2019).  Ad hominem abusive is a variation that employs attacks about an opponent's alleged personal characteristics.

Example from video:

• Alone on stage, Homer Simpson begins by saying, "I'm sorry my opponent didn't think enough of you to show up for this debate." When joined by his opponent, he proceeds to make more personal attacks that have nothing to do with the purpose of the debate.

• Finally, Homer's opponent responds with his own Ad Hominem attack.

Definition:  

Poisoning the Well is an ad hominem fallacy in which the opposing arguer is attacked before even making an argument (McKissick, 2019).

Example from video:

• Ted Cruz is accused of lying whenever he speaks, which would include any of his arguments subsequent to this attack ad.

• Again, this attack has no apparent relevance to any public policy issue, etc., that Ted Cruz tries to address.

Definition:

The technique of persuasion by sheer repetition of a claim or argument (McKissick, 2019).

Example from video:

• The phrase "Apply directly to forehead" is frequently repeated to convince consumers to buy the product.

• Sheer repetition is substituted for addressing relevant issues about the medication's effectiveness, etc.

Definition:

Begging the Question is a variation of Questionable Premise in which the the main proposition that is the subject of the argumentation is assumed true before it is proven.  (McKissick, 2019).

Example from the graphic:

• In the examples from Twitter, two candidates for the 2020 Democratic Party nomination for President seem to be assuming not only that they will be nominated, but that they will then be elected.  Neither was even nominated, let alone elected (but one did become Vice President of the United States).

• This fallacy has also been called "assuming the outcome" or "assuming the thesis."

Definition:

This fallacy is committed when an unproved premise is included in a question (McKissick, 2019).

Example from video:

• In the First Presidential Debate between Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump (9/26/2020), Clinton asked Trump "Do the thousands of people that you have stiffed over the course of your business not deserve an apology from someone who has taken their labor, taken the goods they produced and then refused to pay them?" (https://www.politico.com/story/2016/09/clinton-trump-apologize-workers-228724) 

• The complex (loaded) question includes the questionable premise that he did indeed cheat "the thousands of people," which he denies.

• See also Fallacious Appeal to the People, Plain Folks.

Definition:

This fallacy could be termed “fallacious appeal to coercion,” in that any form of coercion (not just physical harm or the threat of it) may be used to achieve agreement with a claim, thus bypassing relevant issues (McKissick, 2020).

Example from the graphic:

• In November of 2018, the Democrat controlled House of Representatives was holding hearings on whether or not to impeach President Donald Trump.  

• In this Tweet, the President threatens retaliation against the Democrats with investigations in the Republican controlled Senate.  The threat is irrelevant to the merits of the case for impeachment against Donald Trump.

• See also Ad Hominem Tu Quoque.

Definition:

This fallacy is an argument based on a particularly weak or inappropriate comparison (McKissick, 2019). 

Example from video:

• Candidate for US Senate Joni Ernst compared cutting "pork" (a term for unnecessary government spending) with castrating hogs, for which she claims extensive experience.  She also promises to "make them squeal," an apparent reference to political opponents.

• Ernst is using a metaphor, which is, like a simile, a "figurative analogy" between two concepts that are not in the same category.  All figurative analogies are logically faulty as proof.

• See also, Plain Folks, Fallacious Appeal to the People, etc.

Definition:

This fallacy occurs when someone makes a broad generalization about a class or category on the basis of too few, or otherwise unrepresentative, examples.  Also called the Fallacy of Faulty Sample.  (McKissick, 2019).

Example from video:

• Joe Biden carried the state of Pennsylvania over Donald Trump in the 2020 Presidential Election, but the voter featured in the video expresses skepticism based on the impressive number of people ("20,000" to "30,000") who attended rallies supporting Donald Trump.

• Despite such numbers, those attendees were not necessarily typical of the millions of Pennsylvania voters who did not attend the rallies.

• See also, Accent Fallacy.

Definition:

This fallacy is committed when insulting/demeaning words are applied to an individual or group. "Labeling" occurs when such terms are applied to an idea or argument (McKissick, 2019). 

Example from video:

• Olbermann uses a cascade of name calling and labeling.

• The emotional impact of such language serves to distract from any rational discussion of Scott Brown's conduct or qualifications. 

• Also, see Ad Hominem Abusive

Definition:

The opposite of Snob Appeal. This technique involves associating a person or idea with the "ordinary" or "common" person, or with the values associated with such people (McKissick, 2019).

Example from photo: 

• • President Barack Obama shoots baskets on the White House basketball court with Justin Friedlander and his family, July 6, 2010. Friedlander, who was diagnosed with an inoperable brain tumor in March, 2009, has launched an initiative called ÒJustinÕs Quest,Ó, in which he will shoot 40,000 basketball shots, one for every person diagnosed with a primary brain tumor each year in the United States. (Official White House Photo by Pete Souza)

  • Here, you can see the President of the United States playing basketball with children, associating himself with common people.

Definition:

A Questionable Premise occurs when the reasoning/evidence in an argument is untrue, or when their is significant doubt about its truth.  (Premise is another term for reasoning or a statement used as evidence.)

Example from the graphic:

• This August 1, 2020 Instagram post included a claim that California voters would be “turned away” from polling places unless they changed their voting preference to “No to mail in voting.” 

• The claim was investigated by Politifact, which found it to be untrue. Their determination was based on interviews with the California Secretary of State, among other sources, as explained in a post dated September 1, 2020.  (https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2020/sep/01/instagram-posts/social-media-posts-make-false-claim-ca-voters-will/#sources)