MODR 1730 Chapter Notes -Ad Hominem, Argument Principle, Negative Campaigning

59 views5 pages
Published on 22 Apr 2013
York University
Modes Of Reasoning
MODR 1730
1. Appeal to Force or Threat:
Instead of offering rational grounds, he/she threatens or uses force to get
another to do something or to accept an idea
VIOLATION: truth seeking principle, respect principle, argument principle,
resolution principle
“You don’t want to be a social outcast, do you? Then you better join us tom”
“I don’t think it would be wise to run a story on my son’s driving escapades. After all,
my firm does thousands of dollars advertising business with your paper.”
2. Appeal to Emotion, Pity:
When pity, shame, flattery, disgust, sympathy, or some other emotion
instead of to reasons as a way of persuading someone to believe or do
a. Appeal to Pity
-pleading someone or saying something to make them feel SORRY for
“please officer, don’t give me a ticket. Im a single mother on welfare”
b. Appeal to Fear
-using fear to scare someone or making them do what you want
“If you don’t convict this defendant of murder and you do not find him
guilty, you will be his next victim”
c. Appeal to Guilt or Shame
-making someone feel guilty or making them feel in shame of
“you should make an exception and give me an extension otherwise I
will fail the course and would not get a scholarship”
d. Appeal to Flattery
-sucking up to someone so they do what you want them to do
you should make an exception and give me an extension because
your are the most companionate prof on campus”
3. Ad Hominem
Arguer commits fallacy by attacking an individual rather than the
individuals arguments
Arguer’s character is attacked
Unlock document

This preview shows pages 1-2 of the document.
Unlock all 5 pages and 3 million more documents.

Already have an account? Log in
a. Abusive Ad Hominem (Mudslinging, Name-Calling)
-Opponent is insulted or abused
-attempt to make a person characteristic of the opponent a valid
reason to discount his or her ideas
-is effective because once the arguer is made to make a person look
suspicious, ridiculous, or inconsistentthey seem unworthy
“mayor is a sexiest pig so we shouldn’t listen his plans to reorganize City
b. Circumstantial Ad Hominem (Vested Interest)
- argument critized on basis that it just encouraged the interests of
the opponent
- because a person has done it or is used to it, it “must” be dismissed
“we should ignore the views of the mayor on legalizing drugs, he has
admitted to be a casual drug user in his youth”
“sure he opposes rent control: he owns 2 apartment buildings, doesn’t
c. Guilt by Association
-opponent’s arguments are rejected because she/he is the member of
a particular group
*IF YOU DO THIS…THEN U MUST BE THAT…(making someone feel
guilty if they don’t do something)
“If you agree with the theories about global warming you must be a
radical environmentalist”
d. Tu Quoque
- person encouraging a position, is accused of acting in a manner
which contradicts that position (HYPOCRIT)
“How can she tell me to exercise more when I know that all she
does is sit behind a desk?”
e. Poisoning the Wall
-a psychological technique which aims to make it impossible for the
opponent to reply or disagree
*excluding someone from the group
-anyone who objects this looks FOOLISH
-making someone look STUPID
“anyone that has any sense would agree that gun control is necessary”
“Anyone who doubts the presidents approach to the war on terror is
only helping the terror is only helping the terrorists” (if you disagree
then ure assumed a terrorist)
Unlock document

This preview shows pages 1-2 of the document.
Unlock all 5 pages and 3 million more documents.

Already have an account? Log in

Get OneClass Grade+

Unlimited access to all notes and study guides.

YearlyMost Popular
75% OFF
Single doc


You will be charged $119.76 upfront and auto renewed at the end of each cycle. You may cancel anytime under Payment Settings. For more information, see our Terms and Privacy.
Payments are encrypted using 256-bit SSL. Powered by Stripe.