PHIL 101 Lecture Notes - Lecture 6: Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc, Syntactic Ambiguity, Begging
23 Sep 2016
School
Department
Course
Professor
Document Summary
Fallacies arguments in which the premises are logically irrelevant to the conclusion, but are confusing because they appear psychologically relevant: appeal to force. Arguer poses a conclusion to someone suggesting either implicitly or explicitly that some harm will come to them if they don"t accept the conclusion: appeal to pity. Committed when the arguer tries to convince the reader/listener of some conclusion by evoking pity from the reader: appeal to the people, direct arguer addresses large group of people (hitler) b. Indirect appeal to particular people who are not in a group but want to be: ad hominem (against the person) Attacks arguer rather than attacking the argument which was present: must be two arguers, ad hominem abusive (verbal abuse, ad hominem circumstantial ( look at their circumstances , tu quoque (you too) General rule applies to a specific case it wasn"t intended to cover: straw man.
