Scribd
Upload
45 views

Assignment 3

The document summarizes 9 different logical fallacies presented in the movie "Twelve Angry Men". These include stereotyping others based on perception, attacking the person instead of the argument, arguing a lack of evidence proves something, rejecting an argument fearing a bad outcome, assuming causes without direct connection, giving excuses for hypothetical situations, using sympathy to overwhelm logic, reaching conclusions with inadequate evidence, and claiming something is true just because they say so.

Uploaded by

Sader Azam
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
45 views

Assignment 3

The document summarizes 9 different logical fallacies presented in the movie "Twelve Angry Men". These include stereotyping others based on perception, attacking the person instead of the argument, arguing a lack of evidence proves something, rejecting an argument fearing a bad outcome, assuming causes without direct connection, giving excuses for hypothetical situations, using sympathy to overwhelm logic, reaching conclusions with inadequate evidence, and claiming something is true just because they say so.

Uploaded by

Sader Azam
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 1

Sader Azam 2011319 BBA 4 E

Assignment 3
Logics and Critical thinking

Fallacies in Twelve angry men

1. Stereotyping: this fallacy is based on judging a person or a group on the basis of one’s
perception.
2. those kinds of kids run wild and are the ones going around committing crime
3. Ad hominem: this fallacy attacks a person instead of dealing with real issues in any
dispute.
You are all bunch of old ladies if you don’t see that this kid is guilty.
4. Appeal to ignorance: arguing that a lack of evidence proves something.

Well, the kids lawyer didn’t prove that he is innocent, so he must be guilty.

5. Appeal to force: rejecting the argument results something bad.


If we let this kid go free, they will be a murderer roaming the streets.
6. False cause: when two things are not connected directly but we assume that one thing
causes another thing.

Testimonies under oath guarantee that witnesses will always give accurate evidence.

7. Hypothetical reasoning: giving excuses to something that has not happened.

Suppose the kid is guilty because he lives in the slum and the result of living in slum is
crime.
8. Appeal to pity: this fallacy uses the audience sympathy, concern, or guilt in order to
overwhelm their sense of logic.
The kid is not guilty because he has had a troubled upbringing.
9. Hasty generalization: a faulty conclusion is reached because of inadequate evidence
The kid is guilty because I say he is guilty.

You might also like