This online lecture was prepared by Dr. Laura Umphrey in the School of Communication at Northern Arizona University Motivated Reasoning We as humans exercise something called motivated reasoning to reconcile our beliefs. When we know what kind of judgment we want to end up with, we will use the arguments that get us there. We pay more attention to one side or the other and we set a higher standard of validity for the other side. There is an old saying, "I already know what I think so don't confuse me with the facts." The example of the 2000 presidential election is a perfect example: both sides had legitimate arguments. Most people s principles over how the election should have been resolved flowed from their values, beliefs, and political views, we as humans are for the most part unable to look at evidence from a totally objective perspective. Yet, everyone thinks they are being objective (dealing with just the facts and not being distorted by personal belief or political views). All of us should strive to be more objective and to look at arguments and issues through more subjective eyes. To that end, a starting point is to understand the nature of fallacies, to know the different types, to be able to identify them, to recognize them in the arguments of others, and most of all to avoid them in our own arguments. "A fallacy is an error in reasoning that renders an argument false of unreliable" (Gregory, p. 412). Below are the most common types with several examples of each. Hasty Generalization - Making a premature "inductive leap relying on too few instances or occurrences to reach a hasty conclusion. Example #1: Ford is an American-made car. I owned a Ford,
and it broke down all the time. A car that breaks down all the time is not very good. /.. American-made cars are not very good. Example #2: I ate at that new restaurant on Milton the other night, the service was slow and the food was awful, so I am never going there again. Sweeping Generalization - Closely related to a hasty generalization. A statement that is so broad and categorical that it ends up being unfair and inaccurate, often include the words like, always, never, all, and none. As Example #2 illustrates sweeping generalizations are often a source of prejudices and racism. Example #1: Jana went snowboarding in Flagstaff twice and the snow was terrible, so Flagstaff is never a good place to go snowboarding Example #2: Bill: "You know, those feminists all hate men." Joe: "Really?" Bill: "Yeah. I was in my philosophy class the other day and that Rachel chick gave a presentation." Joe: "Which Rachel?" Bill: "You know her. She's the one that runs that feminist group over at the Women's Center. She said that men are all sexist pigs. I asked her why she believed this and she said that her last few boyfriends were real sexist pigs. " Joe: "That doesn't sound like a good reason to believe that all of us are pigs." Bill: "That was what I said." Joe: "What did she say?" Bill: "She said that she had seen enough of men to know we are all pigs. She obviously hates all men." Joe: "So you think all feminists are like her?" Bill: "Sure. They all hate men." Red Herring - The Red Herring fallacy is committed when the arguer diverts the attention of the reader or listener by changing the subject to some totally different, unrelated issue. Example #1: Why should we worry about the amount of violence on television when thousands of people are killed in
automobile accidents each year? Straw Man -(related to the Red Herring) creating a weak caricature of an argument, and attributing it to the opposing side, and then proceeding to demolish it Example #1: Politician: "My opponent believes that higher taxes are the only way to pay for needed improvements. She never met a tax she didn't like. But I have a better idea: let's cut waste in government first." Example #2: Affirmative Action is nothing more than quotas! (Ad hominem) Attacking On A Person (Name Calling) The presenter attacks the person rather than the argument. Do politicians ever do this? Avoid name-calling at all costs! Example #1: "You're telling me I should drink less? You haven't been sober in a year." Example #2: "Rush Limbaugh is nothing but a right-wing wacko, wind bag." Example #3: "Barack Obama is a leftist elitist intellectual who is not connected to everyday working Americans." False Cause - Assuming that because events occur close together in time, they are necessarily related as cause and effect. Beware, cause to effect arguments are difficult to support. Example #1: "The economy is in a recession so it is all President Bush's (insert president or governor) fault." Example #2: "Those two teenagers who committed the Columbine High School murders watched the movie Natural Born Killers over and over again, plus they listened to violent music, so the media is to blame!" Building On An Unproved Assumption - act as if an assertion has been proven when in fact it has not been proven. t.
Example #1: Since the Japanese never make a product that lasts a long time, we should stop buying Japanese products and buy American. Example #2: Distance Learning provides a better education so we should do away with classrooms and everybody should take classes from home. Faulty Analogy - The presenter assumes that because two things are alike in minor ways, they are also alike in major ways. Example #1 - "If we outlaw guns then we must outlaw cars because they both can kill people." Example #2 - " The Internet is not regulated so why should we regulate radio bands." Example #3: Former Glendale Republican Representative Jean McGrath: scoffed at the notion that universities and community colleges need more money to better prepare students for the technology based New Economy: I don t know what the new economy is and neither do my constituents Did we need a New Economy when we invented the telephone or the typewriter? We get computers and all of a sudden we re talking about this New Economy baloney. It s just another reason to tax and spend Can you guess what the faulty analogy is here? There is also a sweeping generalization in this statement, "I don t know what the new economy is and neither do my constituents" Example #4: Bill Gates in response to the governments lawsuit against Microsoft: What the government was seeking in its lawsuit from Microsoft against the way Microsoft markets its Web borrowers was like requiring Coca-Cola to include three cans of Pepsi in every six-pack it sells Either-Or Reasoning - Sometimes referred to as a false dilemma, the either-or fallacy forces listeners to choose between two alternatives when more than two alternatives exist.
Example #1: Either we cut taxes or the economy will slide into a deep recession. Example #2: Either we build a new high school or children in this community will never get into college. Slippery slope - Assumes that taking the first step will lead inevitably to a second step and so on down the slope to disaster. Example #1: If you don't get to bed early, you'll be too tired to do well on the GRE tomorrow - and then you won't get accepted into a decent graduate school and then you'll end up a washed-out alcoholic living in a trash-bin. Example #2:Now it's register handguns. Next it will be all guns. Then they'll ban guns, and we'll be set up for a police state. Bandwagon - Assumes that because something is popular, it is therefore good, correct, or desirable. Example #1 - The President must be correct in his approach to foreign policy; after all, the polls show that 60 percent of the people support him. Example #2: More people use Tylenol than Advil, thus, Tylenol is a better pain reliever.