WHY STUDY LOGIC?

INTRODUCTION TO LOGIC 1. To be critical and rational.

2. To detect and avoid errors, flaws or loopholes in
I. What is LOGIC? arguments so as not to deceive others or
themselves.
• Greek term LOGIKE means a treatise on matters 3. To argue from knowledge, not from ignorance.
pertaining to thoughts. 4. Improved planning.
• Logic is both SCIENCE and ART; it is concerned 5. Enhanced creativity.
with the quest of knowledge and truth, it is also a
study of the validity or correctness of our
reasoning. II. VALID ARGUMENTS
• It is the ANALYSIS AND APPRAISAL OF
ARGUMENTS. It is concerned with the If you overslept, you’ll be late.
relationship between the premise and the You aren’t late.
conclusion. It studies and provides methods Therefore:
and principles used in distinguishing correct and (a) You did oversleep.
incorrect reasoning. (b) You didn’t oversleep.
(c) You’re late.
WHY STUDY LOGIC? (d) None of these follows.
USE OF LOGIC
Regardless of the profession we are in, we always If you overslept, you’ll be late.
use logic. We are human beings possessed with You didn’t oversleep.
reason. We use it when we make decisions or when Therefore:
we try to influence the decision of others or when we (a) You’re late.
are engaged in argumentation and debate. (b) You aren’t late.
(c) You did oversleep.
I.e., A good automobile mechanic uses logic in
(d) None of these follows.
diagnosing mechanical or electrical defects of cars.
Similarly, a scientist uses logic when they make an D bec oversleeping is not the only reason you will
important inference that a particular hypothesis is be late. D is not the conclusion, but it is the correct
true on basis of the results of experiments. A public answer
speaker uses logic in trying to persuade their If the conclusion is not certain, the argument
listeners to adopt their idea. A lawyer presents is NOT VALID.
arguments using the principles of logic to prove the
tenability of their position; otherwise, he send their An ARGUMENT, in the sense used in logic, is a set
client to jail. Everybody uses logic since everyone of statements consisting of premises and a
possesses reason. conclusion. The PREMISES are statements that
WHY STUDY LOGIC? give supporting evidence; the CONCLUSION is
what is allegedly supported by these statements.
1. Logic is important because reasoning is Arguments put into words a possible act of
important. reasoning.
2. Logic can deepen your understanding of
philosophy. - It focuses on the form.
3. Logic can be fun. - Ex conclusion that God is real. (The belief is
conclusion, but the reason is based on
INFORMAL FALLACIES – based on content supporting statements to justify our conclusion)
(soundness) on a particular statement or argument.
In every content seen in social media and
advertisements, statements of teachers, arguments
of politicians, can be seen as fallacious based on our
own way of thinking.
 ELEMENTS OF REASONING HOW CAN WE DETERMINE THE VALIDITY OF
AN AGRUMENT?
PREMISE, CONCLUSION, AND ARGUMENT

• In each case we are concerned with evidence for • An ARGUMENT IS VALID if it would be
the truth of some proposition. In logic, this contradictory (impossible) to have the premises
proposition is called a CONCLUSION. The all true and conclusion false. In calling an
evidence in support of the conclusions consists argument valid, we aren’t saying whether the
or other propositions called PREMISES. premises are true. We’re just saying that the
• A set of premises together with a conclusion is conclusion follows from the premises – that if
called an ARGUMENT. In everyday speech, this the premises were all true, then the conclusion
term is often used to mean a quarrel between also would have to be true. In saying this, we
two people. but it is also used to mean an implicitly assume that there’s no shift in the
appeal to evidence in support of a meaning or reference of the terms; hence we
conclusion. In logic. we use the term argument must use “overslept,” “late,” and “you” the same
in the latter sense. It means a set of way throughout the argument.
propositions in which some propositions
(the premises) are asserted as support or • Our argument is valid because of its LOGICAL
evidence for another (the conclusion.) FORM – its arrangement of logical notions (like
Another way to but this is to say that the “if-then” and “not”) and content phrases (like
conclusion is inferred from the premises. “You overslept” and “You’re late”). We can
Thus, an argument can also be described as display an argument’s form by using words or
an inference and we will use those terms symbols for logical notions and letters for content
interchangeably. phrases:
Examples of arguments:

Rivers in Taiwan

Premise 1: Water flows in the direction of the forces acting on it.

Premise 2: The primary force acting on rivers in Taiwan is
gravity.
Premise 3: Gravity pulls downward.
Conclusion: Rivers in Taiwan flow downhill

Gun control-for

Premise 1: Restricting ownership of handguns would reduce

crime.
Premise 2: Government should pursue the goal of reducing
crime.
Conclusion: The government should restrict ownership of
handguns.

RECOGNIZING ARGUMENTS
Premise Indicators Conclusion Indicators
• Since • Therefore
• Because • Thus
• As • So
• For • Consequently
• Given that • As a result
• Assuming that • It follows that
• In as much as • Hence
• The reason is that • Which means
• In view of the fact that
that • Which implies
that
• Arguments are valid it eh TRUTH OF THE SOUND ARGUMENTS
PREMISES SUCCESSFULLY PROVES THE Logicians distinguish valid arguments from
TRUTH OF THE CONCLUSION IS CERTAIN; sound arguments: An ARGUMENT IS VALID if it
invalid if it does not so. would be contradictory to have the premises all true
and conclusion false.
SOME FORMS OF VALID AND INVALID An ARGUMENT IS SOUND if it’s valid and has every
ARGUMENTS premise true. Calling an argument “valid” says
Given: nothing about whether its premises are true. But
P and Q represents 2 separate statements calling it “sound” says that it’s valid (the conclusion
A, B, and C represent 3 different objects. follows from the premises) and has true premises.
VALID FORMS INVALID FORMS Here’s an example of a sound argument:
(1) If P, then Q (1) If P, then Q
P. Q
Therefore, Q Therefore, P
(2) If P, then Q (2) If P, then Q
Not Q Not P
Therefore, Not P Therefore, not Q
(3) All As are Bs (3) All As are Bs
All Bs are Cs All Cs are Bs
Therefore, All As are Therefore, all As are
Cs Cs
(4) All As are Bs (4) All As are Bs
C is a A C is an B
Therefore C is a B Therefore, C is a A.
Valid (1st form) and Sound
1 and 2 are CONDITIONAL ARGUMENTS
3 and 4 are CATEGORICAL ARGUMENTS An argument could be unsound in either of two
ways:
(1) it might have a false premise
3 in Valid form (2) its conclusion might not follow from the
premises

A
B
C

3 in Invalid form Valid (4th form) but not sound

what if nakalagay some logicians are millionaire
and second premise are both true, but the
conclusion is not certain kasi some. If “SOME” is
used, it is already uncertain sa conclusion.

A B PERO PWEDE: (ata?)

Some logicians are millionaire.
Some millionaires are smart.
Gensler is a logician.
Therefore, Gensler is smart.
C
 premise, we’d have to argue that the Bradley effect
would appear in the final election but not in the
primaries; but it’s unclear how one might defend this.
So an argument like this changes the nature of the
discussion. (By the way, there was no Bradley effect
when the general election took place a month later.)

• DEDUCTIVE ARGUMENTS, where the

Invalid (4th form) and not sound.
conclusion is claimed to follow with
necessity.
• INDUCTIVE ARGUMENTS, where the
Criticizing Unsound Argument:
conclusion is claimed to follow only with
1. We try to show either that one of the premises
probability. This claim is either implicit orelse
is false or that the conclusion doesn’t follow
expressed by terms like “probably.”
2. we must invent an argument of our own that
shows the view to be false.
Deductively valid Inductively strong
3. we could try to show that one or more of the
All who live in France live in Europe.
premises are very uncertain.
Pierre lives in France.
Á Pierre lives in Europe.
• Besides asking whether premises are true,
we could ask how certain they are, to
Most who live in France speak French.
ourselves or to others. We’d like our premises to
Pierre lives in France.
be certain and obvious to everyone. We usually
This is all we know about the matter.
have to settle for less than this; our premises are
Á Pierre speaks French (probably).
often educated guesses or personal convictions.
Our arguments are only as strong as their
The first argument has a tight connection between
premises. This suggests a third strategy for
premises and conclusion; it would be impossible for
criticizing an argument; we could try to show
the premises to all be true but the conclusion false.
that one or more of the premises are very
uncertain.
The second has a looser premise–conclusion
connection. Relative to the premises, the conclusion
Here’s another example of an argument. In fall 2008,
is only a good guess; it’s likely true but could be false
before Barack Obama was elected US president, he
(perhaps Pierre is the son of the Polish ambassador
was far ahead in the polls. But some thought he’d be
and speaks no French).
defeated by the “Bradley effect,” whereby many
whites say they’ll vote for a black candidate but in
SUMMARY
fact don’t. Barack’s wife Michelle, in a CNN interview
with Larry King (October 8), argued that there
VALID and VALID and INVALID and
wouldn’t be a Bradley effect:
SOUND UNSOUND UNSOUND
Barack Obama is the Democratic nominee. Follows a Follows a Has an illogical
If there was going to be a Bradley effect, Barack logical form. logical form. form.
wouldn’t be the nominee
[because the effect would have shown up in the Contains True Contains False
primary elections]. Proposition: Proposition: Therefore, it is
Á There isn’t going to be a Bradley effect. Premise/s are At least one already
true. premise is unsound.
Once she gives this argument, we can’t just say false.
“Well, my opinion is that there will be a Bradley Therefore,
effect.” Instead, we have to respond to her Conclusion is Therefore,
true. Conclusion is
reasoning. It’s clearly valid – the conclusion follows
false.
from the premises. Are the premises true? The first
premise was undeniable. To dispute the second
 TRUTH AND VALIDITY If Bill Gates owned all the gold in Fort Knox, then Bill
Gates would be wealthy. (T)
There are many possible combinations of true and Bill Gates does not own all the gold in Fort Knox. (T)
false premises and conclusions in both valid and Therefore, Bill Gates is not wealthy. (F)
invalid arguments. Here follow seven illustrative
arguments, each prefaced by the statement of the The premises of this argument are true, but its
combination (of truth and validity) that it represents. conclusion is false. Such an argument cannot be valid
With these illustrations (whose content is because it is impossible for the premises of a valid
argument to be true and its conclusion to be false.
deliberately trivial) before us, we will be in a position
to formulate some important principles concerning
the relations between truth and validity.
V. Some valid arguments have false
I. Some valid arguments contain only true
premises and a true conclusion:
propositions—true premises and a true
All fishes are mammals. (F)
conclusion:
All whales are fishes. (F)
All mammals have lungs. (T)
Therefore all whales are mammals. (T)
All whales are mammals. (T) Unsound bec 2 premise are false
Therefore, all whales have lungs. (T)
The conclusion of this argument is true, as we know;
moreover, it may be validly inferred from these two
II. Some valid arguments contain only false premises, both of which are wildly false.
propositions—false premises and a false
conclusion: VI. Some invalid arguments also have false
All four-legged creatures have wings. (F) premises and a true conclusion:
All spiders have exactly four legs. (F) All mammals have wings. (F)
Therefore, all spiders have wings. (F) All whales have wings. (F)
Therefore all whales are mammals. (T)
This argument is valid because, if its premises were
true, its conclusion would have to be true also—even From Examples V and VI taken together, it is clear that
though we know that in fact both the premises and the we cannot tell from the fact that an argument has false
conclusion of this argument are false. premises and a true conclusion whether it is valid or
invalid.
III. Some invalid arguments contain only true
propositions—all their premises are true, VII. Some invalid arguments, of course,
and their conclusions are true as well: contain all false propositions—false
If I owned all the gold in Fort Knox, then I would be premises and a false conclusion:
wealthy. (T) All mammals have wings. (F)
I do not own all the gold in Fort Knox. (T) All whales have wings (F)
Therefore, I am not wealthy. (T) Therefore all mammals are whales. (F)

Invalid form (2nd form) These seven examples make it clear that there are
valid arguments with false conclusions (Example II),
The true conclusion of this argument does not follow as well as invalid arguments with true conclusions
from its true premises. This will be seen more clearly (Examples III and VI). Hence it is clear that the truth
when the immediately following illustration is
or falsity of an argument’s conclusion does not by
considered.
itself determine the validity or invalidity of that
argument. Moreover, the fact that an argument is
IV. Some invalid arguments contain only true valid does not guarantee the truth of its conclusion
premises and have a false conclusion. (Example II). Invalid arguments can have every
This is illustrated by an argument exactly like possible combination of true and false premises and
the previous one (III) in form, changed only conclusions.
enough to make the conclusion false.
 1. A valid argument with one true premise, one
false premise, and a false conclusion In contrast, none of the following sentences are
2. A valid argument with one true premise, one statements:
false premise, and a true conclusion o Please help yourself to more casserole
3. An invalid argument with two true premises (imperative)
and a false conclusion o Don’t tell your mother about the surprise
4. An invalid argument with two true premises (imperative)
and a true conclusion o Do you like KPOP? (interrogative)
5. A valid argument with two false premises and o OMG! What a spectacular performance from
a true conclusion ENHYPEN! (Exclamatory)
6. An invalid argument with two false premises
and a true conclusion Abortion is morally wrong because it is wrong to take
7. An invalid argument with one true premise, the life of an innocent human being, and a fetus is
one false premise, and a true conclusion an innocent human being.
8. A valid argument with two true premises and
a true conclusion We could capture the structure of that argument like
this:
1. It is morally wrong to take the life of an
WHAT IS AN ARGUMENT? innocent human being
2. A fetus is an innocent human being
1. An argument is a heated exchange of 3. Therefore, abortion is morally wrong
differing views.
An argument is a set of statements, some of which
Ex: Sally: Abortion is morally wrong and those who (the premises) attempt to provide a reason for
think otherwise are seeking to justify murder! thinking that some other statement (the conclusion)
is true.
Bob: Abortion is not morally wrong and those who
think so are right-wing bigots who are seeking to IDENTIFYING ARGUMENTS
impose their narrow-minded views on all the rest of
us! How to identify an argument?
1. ask whether there is a statement that
2. An argument, in this sense, is a reason for someone is trying to establish as true by
thinking that a statement, claim or idea is basing it on some other statement
true. 2. is knowing certain keywords or phrases that
are premise indicators or conclusion
Ex: Sally: Abortion is morally wrong because it is indicators.
wrong to take the life of an innocent human being,
and a fetus is an innocent human being. Premise Indicators Conclusion Indicators
• Since • Therefore
Abortion is morally wrong (CONCLUSION) because • Because • Thus
it is wrong to take the life of an innocent human • As • So
being, and a fetus is an innocent human being. • For • Consequently
(PREMISE) • Given that • As a result
• Assuming that • It follows that
A STATEMENT is a type of sentence that can be true • In as much as • Hence
or false and corresponds to the grammatical • The reason is that • Which means
category of a “declarative sentence.” • In view of the fact that
that • Which implies
Ex: The Nile is a river in northeastern Africa is a • is shown by the that
statement. (True) fact that • we may
The Yangtze is a river in Japan. (False) conclude that
you can’t simply mindlessly use occurrences of over the past four decades have increasingly
these words in sentences to show that there is an contained high levels of sugar and low levels of
argument being made. dietary fiber. Since eating foods high in sugar and
low in fiber triggers the insulin system to start storing
Ex: those calories as fat, it follows that people who
I have been running competitively since 1999. consume foods high in sugar and low in fiber will
I am so happy to have finally finished that class. tend to store more of the calories consumed as fat

3. noting that both premise indicators and FALLACY

conclusion indicators are, grammatically,
conjunctions. A grammatical conjunction is One reasons incorrectly when the premises of an
a word that connects two separate argument fail to support its conclusion, and
statements. arguments of that sort may be called FALLACIOUS.
So in a very general sense, any error in reasoning
Ex: Tom was sleeping, so he couldn’t have is a FALLACY. Similarly, any mistaken idea or false
answered the phone. belief may sometimes be labeled “fallacious.”

Let’s Try!
1. I have been wrangling cattle since before you A FORMAL FALLACY is a pattern of mistake that
were old enough to tie your own shoes. (NOT AN appears in deductive arguments of a certain
ARGUMENT) specifiable form.
2. Albert is angry with me so he probably won’t be
willing to help me wash the dishes.
(ARGUMENT) INFORMAL FALLACIES, arise from confusions
3. First I washed the dishes and then I dried them. concerning the content of the language used.
(NOT AN ARGUMENT) - They are patterns of mistake that are made in the
4. If the road wasn’t icy, the car wouldn’t have slid everyday uses of language.
off the turn. (ARGUMENT) - Informal fallacies are numerous and can
5. Albert isn’t a fireman and he isn’t a fisherman therefore be best understood if they are grouped
either. (NOT AN ARGUMENT) into categories, each with clearly identifiable
6. Are you seeing that rhinoceros over there? It is features. Some include: Fallacies of
huge! (NOT AN ARGUMENT) Relevance, Fallacies of Defective Induction,
Fallacies of Presumption, and Fallacies of
Ambiguity.
ARGUMENTS VS. EXPLANATIONS
There is no limit to the variety of forms in which that
ARGUMENT content may appear, and thus informal fallacies are
often more difficult to detect than formal ones.
Those that attempt to establish that their
conclusion is true. FALLACIES OF RELEVANCE

Ex: We know that obesity is on the rise in the U.S. Most numerous and the most frequently
because multiple studies carried out by the CDC and encountered.
NIH have consistently shown a rise in obesity over In these fallacies, the premises of the argument
the last four decades. are simply not relevant to the conclusion.

EXPLANATION R1: The appeal to the populace (argument ad

An argument that attempts to show why its populum)
conclusion is true is an explanation. the attempt to win popular assent to a conclusion by
arousing the feelings of the multitude. It is the
The reason that the rate of obesity is on the rise in baldest of all fallacies, and yet it is one of the most
the U.S. is that the foods we most often consume common.
 Ex:
Example: Sixteen Million people voted for this Sally: My job is draining me.
president, that makes him the best president. Poppy: The unemployment rate in the Philippines is
increasing.
Example: A lot of people are using credit cards when
paying for goods and services. Therefore, it is the Ex: In the world of finance, a prospectus issued to
best type of card, and you should use it too. attract investors in a company about to go public,
which tells much about the company but not the
Example: During flu season, drugstores and price of its shares, is also called a red herring.
pharmacies easily ran out of stock of Biogesic
because many people take it for fever and Ex: The café received numerous bad reviews from
headache. Thus, Biogesic is the best medicine for its customers, stating that its coffee tasted bland, but
fever and headache. let's not forget that the café recently started using
environmentally-friendly coffee cups, which are
much better for the planet.
R2: The appeal to emotion (argument ad
misericordiam) Ex: Workers at a fast-food restaurant are requesting
The Latin word ad misericordiam literally means a salary raise because the company offers
“merciful heart”; this fallacy is the emotional appeal promotional meals, but the manager says "You
to pity. know, we work really hard to make a good product.
We try to ensure the best customer service, too.
Example: “Please give me a passing grade, my old
poor parents are expecting me to graduate this
year!” R4: The straw man
If one argues against some view by presenting an
Example: If you truly care about animals, you should opponent’s position as one that is easily torn apart,
buy our products since 5% of the proceeds will be the argument is fallacious, of course. Such an
donated to an animal welfare organization. argument commits the fallacy of the strawman.

Example: Supporting this charity is the only way to It is an effort to shift the conflict from its original
show that you care about the suffering of innocent complexity into a different conflict, between parties
children in poverty. If you don't donate, you're other than those originally in dispute.
heartless and indifferent to their pain.
Ex: You are against death penalty? So, you think that
Thus one might also distinguish: the lives of murderers and criminals are more
o appeal to envy (ad invidiam), important than the lives of their innocent victims?
o appeal to fear (ad metum)
o appeal to hatred (ad odium), Ex: “You want to change the terms and conditions of
o appeal to pride (ad superbium). our contract? So you despise me because you
refuse to sign the deal.
R3: The red herring
a fallacious argument whose effectiveness lies in Ex: "So you want to completely abandon traditional
distraction. Attention is deflected; readers or advertising methods that have been working for us
listeners are drawn to some aspect of the topic under for years and put all our eggs in the online basket?"
discussion by which they are led away from the issue
that had been the focus of the discussion. R5: The attack to the person (ad hominem)
The phrase ad hominem translates as “against the
They are urged to attend to some observation or person.” An ad hominem argument is one in which
some claim that may be associated with the topic, the thrust is directed, not at a conclusion, but at
but that is not relevant to the truth of what had some person who defends the conclusion in dispute.
originally been in dispute.
are fallacious (and often unfair to the adversary) Ex: You are not force to follow this rule, but one must
because an attack against some person is generally be prepared to face the consequence though.
not relevant to the objective merits of the argument
that person has put forward. "Do you agree with my project or do you want to risk
losing your job?"
two major forms of the argument ad hominem:
ABUSIVE – One is tempted, in heated argument, to "If you don't invest in my startup, you'll regret it. I
disparage the character of one’s opponents, to deny have powerful connections in the industry, and if you
their intelligence or reasonableness, to question don't support me, they might make things difficult for
their understanding, or their seriousness, or even your business.
their integrity.
Most of the time sexual assault in the workplace and
Example: Of course it will be hard for you to understand classrooms are actually done or committed using
why college education matters? You always got the lowest APPEAL TO FORCE are those in power madalas
score in our class! gumagawa (the power to influence and manipulate)
“You should not start a business because it is hard to
manage, you’re not even a businessman and you’ve
always been a weakling!” R7: Missing the point (irrelevant conclusion)
ARISTOTLE, the first to give a systematic
“You? You're aiming to be a successful entrepreneur? You classification of the informal fallacies, explains the
don't even have what it takes to be an entrepreneur, let fallacy we call missing the point, or ignoratio
alone be successful!” elenchi, as a mistake that is made in seeking to
refute another’s argument.
CIRCUMSTANTIAL – The circumstances of one
who makes (or rejects) some claim have no more Also known as IGNORATIO ELENCHI - as a mistake
bearing on the truth of what is claimed than does his that is made in seeking to refute another’s argument.
character. The mistake made in the circumstantial
form of the ad hominem fallacy is to treat those The Latin word elenchi is derived from a Greek word
personal circumstances as the premise of an that means a “disproof,” or a “refutation.” An
opposing argument. ignoratio elenchi is a mistaken refutation.

Example: Taylor Swift is not feminist because she’s a rich One that goes haywire because the person
white woman who dated Matty Healy. presenting it does not fully understand the
Example 2: Oh for sure she is in favor of the anti-terror
proposition in dispute. He refute or tries to refute, a
bill! She cannot be a good senator; she’s her father’s
daughter!
claim other than that which was originally at issue.
He misses the point.

Abusive – based on its own experience. Ex: Somebody asked about the missing funds in an
Circumstantial – based on other’s experience. agency and you reply by pointing out how
employees enjoyed the perks and bonuses that they
R6: The appeal to force (ad baculum) receive.
appeal ad baculum means literally “appeal to the
stick”! SHORT ACTIVITY
1. Jewel: Hanniqa attended TXT’s concert in Manila, not
It seems odd to suppose that one could hope to ENHYPEN’s Manifesto. Shean: Hanniqa hates
ENHYPEN. (Attack on Person)
establish some proposition as true, or persuade
some other person of its truth, by resorting to force.
2. Jewel: OH MY GOD! I lost my diamond earring. Mark:
Many people are dying out of starvation. (Missing
Threats or strong-arm methods to coerce one’s the point)
opponents can hardly be considered arguments at
all. 3. Jhee, a lawyer argued “This man on trial stands
accused of murder, and the penalty is death! Murder
 is the most heinous of crimes, which deserves to be Ex: Example: According to the governor “suob” is the
met with an eye for an eye!” (Strawman) best cure for Covid-19, so, it must be true.
“Our Dr. Alvin ’s skincare products are a must-buy
FALLACIES OF DEFECTIVE INDUCTION because Francine Diaz, a renowned celebrity, loves
In fallacies of defective induction, which are also and endorses them on her Instagram account. If she
common, the mistake arises from the fact that the loves them, you know they're the best."
premises of the argument, although relevant to We should focus on planting and selling
the conclusion, are so weak and ineffective that sinandomeng rice because our esteemed local
relying on them is a blunder. mayors in the province recommended it. If it' s good
D1: The argument from ignorance (argumentum enough for them, it must be the right choice for our
ad ignorantiam) rice business

If he or she argues that something is true because it

has not been proved false, or false because it has D3: False cause (non causa pro causa) or Post
not been proved true. Hoc
Ignorance sometimes obliges us to suspend Presuming the reality of a causal connection that
judgement, assigning neither truth nor falsity to the does not really exist is a common mistake; in Latin
proposition in doubt. the mistake is called the fallacy of non causa pro
Ex: You haven’t seen a unicorn. Therefore, it doesn’t causa; we call it simply the fallacy of false cause.
exist. It is obvious that any reasoning that relies on treating
Example 2: There is no need for digitization; our as the cause of something or event what is not really
generation has survived on logbooks and its cause must be seriously mistaken.
typewriters. Example: My business prospers, thanks to the
Ex: “We don’t need to feel threatened or think of money tree necklace that you gave me!
another marketing strategy for our business because “Let’s not invest in the Philippine Stock Market. Its
our competitor ’s products aren’t proven to be better price plummets every time we invest in it.”
than our product. It would be a waste of money as
we are still on top of our business line’s sales.” “Let’s not invest in the Philippine Stock Market. Its
price plummets every time we invest in it.”
Ex: “Our company has not received any customer
complaints about our new product. No other
company in our industry has launched a similar
D4: Hasty generalization
product before. Therefore, our new product is
undoubtedly the best in the market.” we draw conclusions about all the persons or things
in a given class on the basis of our knowledge about
only one (or only a very few) of the members of that
D2: The appeal to inappropriate authority class.

“Argumentum ad Verecundiam fallacy ” "Converse Accident" or "Jumping to

Conclusions,"
Arises when the appeal is made to parties who have
no legitimate claim to authority in the matter at hand. Example: I was in the supermarket yesterday and I
saw some shoppers, who are not wearing
It is a logical fallacy to say that a claim is true simply facemasks, ahh! Filipinos are hardheaded! We have
because it was made by an authority figure. This to blame them for rising Covid -19 cases.
authority figure could be anyone: a teacher, a
politician, a celebrity, an author, or simply someone
with experience connected to the subject of the
claim.
SHORT ACTIVITY P2: Complex question
1. Aubrey: Cases of violence against women are
increasing. Men are trash! (HASTY is to ask a question in such a way as to presuppose
GENERALIZATION) the truth of some conclusion that is buried in the
2. All of Scooter Braun’s artists like Ariana Grande, question.
Justin Bieber, and Demi Lovato left his entertainment
company. This is Karma by Taylor Swift. (FALSE Example: Why is student X better than student Y?
CAUSE)
Why does Starbucks marketing strategy is the most
3. Big Bang is not true according to our pastor.
effective strategy than the other coffee shop?
(APPEAL TO INAPPROPRIATE AUTHORITY)
4. You cannot prove that God exists. Thus, his existence Has your company stopped cheating on its taxes?
is a fragment of your imagination. (APPEAL FROM
IGNORANCE)

P3: Begging The Question

FALLACIES OF PRESUMPTION
It is the mistake of assuming the truth of what one
In fallacies of presumption, too much is assumed seeks to prove.
in the premises. The inference to the conclusion
depends mistakenly on these unwarranted The “question” in a formal debate is the issue that
assumptions. is in dispute; to “beg” the question is to ask, or to
suppose, that the very matter in controversy be
P1: Accident or Dicto Simpliciter conceded.
A generalization that is largely true may not apply This is an argument with no merit at all, of course,
in a given case (or to some subcategory of cases) and one who makes such an assumption commits a
for good reasons. The reasons the generalization gross fallacy.
does not apply in those cases have to do with the
special circumstances, also called the “accidental” Example: To be well known one must be famous, to
circumstance. If these accidental circumstances be famous one must be well known.
are ignored, and we assume that the generalization Example: The iPhone from Apple Company is the
applies universally, we commit the fallacy of best smartphone on the market because there isn’t
accident. a company that makes a phone as good as Apple.
Dicto Simpliciter means an argument based on an Example: SM Investments Corporation (SMIC) or
unqualified generalization. the SM Group is the largest conglomerate in our
Example: “Taking a life is a crime and morally wrong; country because it is one of the most successful firm
therefore, killing animals for food is a crime and in the industry.
morally wrong.”
Example: One may believe that silence speaks SHORT ACTIVITY
volumes, but if you are a lawmaker you cannot claim 1. No one should go to war because everyone knows
that you do not speak that much because of that that one should not kill another person. (ACCIDENT)
belief. 2. Are going to vote an incompetent and corrupt public
official as president? (COMPLEX QUESTION)
Example: I heard that Steve Jobs dropped out of 3. Criminal allegations against our family is not true
college and became successful, so dropping out of because we are not in jail. (BEGGING THE
college is the key to entrepreneurial success. QUESTION)

Example: I know of a company that never invested

in marketing and still managed to grow rapidly.
FALLACIES OF AMBIGUITY
Therefore, spending money on marketing is
unnecessary for business growth. The incorrect reasoning in fallacies of ambiguity arises
from the equivocal use of words or phrases. Some
word or phrase in one part of the argument has a meaning
different from that of the same word or phrase in another
part of the argument.
A1: Equivocation A4: Composition

Most words have more than one literal meaning, and most The term fallacy of composition is applied to both of two
of the time we have no difficulty keeping those meanings closely related types of mistaken argument.
separate by noting the context and using our good sense
when reading and listening. The first may be described as reasoning fallaciously from
the attributes of the parts of a whole to the attributes of
Yet when we confuse the several meanings of a word or the whole itself.
phrase— accidentally or deliberately—we are using the
word equivocally Example: because every part of a certain machine is light
in weight, the machine “as a whole” is light in weight.
Example: Ana went window shopping yesterday, when
she came home not a window in sight. Example:

“Successful businesses aims for growth, which means Nails are part of a machine.
they strive for growth of their stores’ physical locations. Nails are lightweight.
Therefore, machines are also lightweight.
“One of our company’s sales strategies is to gain a
significant share of the market. So, tomorrow, we will be
heading out to the city market. Example:

The individual supplier for electronics fragments is part of

the ABC Electronics Company.
A2: Amphiboly

The fallacy of amphiboly occurs when one is arguing from The individual suppliers for electronics fragments have
premises whose formulations are ambiguous because of excellent reputations for producing quality and reliable
their grammatical construction. electronics.

The word “amphiboly” is derived from the Greek, its Therefore, the entire ABC Electronics Company has an
meaning in essence being “two in a lump,” or the excellent reputation for producing quality and reliable
“doubleness” of a lump electronics.
A statement is amphibolous when its meaning is
A product is part of a business.
indeterminate because of the loose or awkward way in
A product is profitable.
which its words are combined.
Therefore, businesses are profitable.
Example: Ladies, don’t forget the rummage sale. It’s a
chance to get rid of those things not worth keeping around
A5: Division
the house. Bring your husbands.
The fallacy of division is simply the reverse of the fallacy
“Our store manager said we have the best deals for
of composition. As in the case of composition, two
students, and our teachers. ”
varieties of the fallacy of division may be distinguished.
“3 rooms, river view, private phone, bath, kitchen, utilities
1. arguing fallaciously that what is true of a whole
included.”
must also be true of its parts.

Ex: a certain machine is heavy, or complicated, or

A3: Accent valuable, to the conclusion that this or any other part of
the machine must be heavy, or complicated, or valuable
When the premise of an argument relies on one possible
emphasis, but a conclusion drawn from it relies on the Machine is heavyweight.
meaning of the same words emphasized differently. Nails are parts of the machine.
Therefore, nails are heavyweight
Example: I don’t really love you now.

Example: Some advertisements that give emphasis on Ex. To argue that, because a certain corporation is very
some words in order to entice customers. SALE ALERT! important and Mr. Doe is an official of that corporation,
Up to 50% Off on selected items. therefore Mr. Doe is very important.
“BUY 1 GET 1 FREE until supplies last.”

“FREE SHIPPING ” with a minimum spend of Php 499.00

 Fallacies detected in Love is a Fallacy by Max
Shulman:
2. when one argues from the attributes of a
collection of elements to the attributes of the 1. Dicto Simpliciter or Accident (PRESUMPTION)
elements themselves. 2. Hasty Generalization (DEFECTIVE
INDUCTION)
Ex. because university students study medicine, law,
3. Post Hoc or False Cause (DEFECTIVE
engineering, dentistry, and architecture, therefore each,
INDUCTION)
or even any, university student studies medicine, law,
4. Contradictory Premises - contradictory
engineering, dentistry, and architecture.
premises presented in an argument that
- It is true that university students, collectively, study all cannot logically lead to a sound
these various subjects, but it is false that university conclusion.
students, distributively, do so. 5. Ad Misericordiam or Appeal to Emotions
(RELEVANCE)
Apple Inc. is one of the most profitable companies in the 6. False Analogy - draws a comparison
world. between two premises that are alike in
some way but not sufficiently similar in
Dane Angelo is an employee of Apple Inc.
relevant aspects.
Therefore, every employee at Apple Inc., like Dane 7. Hypothesis Contrary to Fact - statement as if
Angelo, must be extremely wealthy. it were a factual hypothesis without strong
supporting evidence. It involves
speculating a hypothetical situation that
contradicts an established fact.
8. Poisoning the Well similar to Attack to the
person (RELEVANCE)

“Love is a Fallacy” By Max Shulman

EXPLICIT FALLACIES EXAMPLES:
1. Dicto Simpliciter
• Meaning: Dicto Simpliciter means an argument based on an unqualified generalization.

• Fallacy 1 given in the story: “Exercise is good. Therefore everybody should exercise.”
• Protagonist’s reason for being fallacious: The argument is a fallacy. Exercise is good is an unqualified
generalization. For instance, if you have heart disease, exercise is bad, not good. Many people are
ordered by their doctors not to exercise. You must qualify the generalization. You must say exercise is
usually good, or exercise is good for most people.

• Fallacy 2 given in the story: "You mustn't take all these things so literally. I mean this is just classroom
stuff. You know that the things you learn in school don't have anything to do with life."
• Analysis for being fallacious: This statement is considered fallacious because the protagonist is
making a generalization that all things learned in school lack significance in life, dismissing them as mere
"classroom stuff." While not everything learned in school is immediately applicable, education still serves
as the foundation for knowledge and skills. The statement oversimplifies the relationship between
classroom learning and its real-life applications.

2. Hasty Generalization
• Meaning: Also referred to as “Jumping to Conclusions.” It is a logical fallacy that draws conclusion about
all persons or things in a given class on the basis of our knowledge about only one (or only a very few)
of the members of that class.

• Fallacy 1 given in the story: “You can't speak French. I can't speak French. Petey Bellows can't speak
French. I must therefore conclude that nobody at the University of Minnesota can speak French."
 • Protagonist’s reason for being fallacious: The generalization is reached too hastily. There are too few
instances to support such a conclusion.

• Fallacy 2 given in the story: "We have now spent five evenings together. We have gotten along
splendidly. It is clear that we are well matched."
• Polly’s reason being fallacious: "How can you say that we are well matched on the basis of only five
dates?" – Polly determines that the protagonist draws a broad conclusion about their compatibility based
on a limited interaction. This overlooks other factors that can influence their comparability to be well
matched.

• Fallacy 3 given in the story: “The successful lawyers I had observed were, almost without exception,
married to beautiful, gracious, intelligent women.”
• Analysis for being fallacious: According to the protagonist, he generalized that successful lawyers are
married to beautiful, gracious, intelligent women. It overlooked other factors that contributes to the
success of lawyers.

3. Post Hoc
• Meaning: Post Hoc is short for the Latin phrase “post hoc ergo propter hoc,” which means “before this
therefore because of this.” This creates a false cause because it assumes that the first event resulted the
second event.
• Fallacies given in the story:
o “Let's not take Bill on our picnic. Everytime we take him out with us, it rains."
o "A girl back home--Eula Becker, her name is. It never fails. Every single time we take her on a
picnic--"
• Protagonist’s reason for being fallacious: it's a fallacy. Eula Becker doesn't cause the rain. She has
no connection with the rain. You are guilty of Post Hoc if you blame Eula Becker.

4. Contradictory Premises
• Meaning: It refers to contradictory premises presented in an argument that cannot logically lead to a
sound conclusion.

• Fallacy 1 given in the story: “If God can do anything, can He make a stone so heavy that He won't be
able to lift it?"
• Protagonist’s reason for being fallacious: But if He can do anything, He can lift the stone. Because
when the premises of an argument contradict each other, there can be no argument. If there is an
irresistible force, there can be no immovable object. If there is an immovable object, there can be no
irresistible force.

5. Ad Misericordiam or Appeal to Emotions

• Meaning: Misericordiam is a Latin term meaning “to appeal to pity.” It is a fallacy that tries to win an
argument by targeting the emotional appeal or sympathy of the audience.

• Fallacy 1 given in the story: "A man applies for a job. When the boss asks him what his qualifications
are, he replies that he has a wife and six children at home, the wife is a helpless cripple, the children
have nothing to eat, no clothes to wear, no shoes on their feet, there are no beds in the house, no coal
in the cellar, and winter is coming."
• Protagonist’s reason for being fallacious: The man never answered the boss's question about his
qualifications. Instead he appealed to the boss's sympathy.

• Fallacy 2 given in the story: "Polly, I love you. You are the whole world to me, and the moon and the
stars and the constellations of outer space. Please, my darling, say that you will go steady with me, for if
you will not, life will be meaningless. I will languish. I will refuse my meals. I will wander the face of the
earth, a shambling, hollow-eyed hulk."
 • Analysis for being fallacious: The protagonist's argument relies on emotional manipulation by
emphasizing his intense love for Polly and the potential negative consequences he will face if Polly
doesn't agree to his request.

6. False Analogy
• Meaning: It is an argument that draws a comparison between two premises that are alike in some way
but not sufficiently similar in relevant aspects. This results in a fallacious argument because it assumes
that just because one thing is alike, it equates the totality of their aspects to be the same.

• Fallacy 1 given in the story: “Students should be allowed to look at their textbooks during examinations.
After all, surgeons have X rays to guide them during an operation, lawyers have briefs to guide them
during a trial, carpenters have blueprints to guide them when they are building a house. Why, then,
shouldn't students be allowed to look at their textbooks during an examination?”
• Protagonist’s reason for being fallacious: The argument is all wrong. Doctors, lawyers, and carpenters
aren't taking a test to see how much they have learned, but students are. The situations are altogether
different, and you can't make an analogy between them.

• Fallacy 2 given in the story: "five dates is plenty. After all, you don't have to eat a whole cake to know
that it's good."
• Polly’s reason being fallacious: "I'm not a cake. I'm a girl." – The analogy is fallacious because it
equates dating and the taste of a cake, wrongly assuming them to be the same. Polly's retort underscores
that a relationship requires connections, shared values, and emotions that cannot be equated to simply
evaluating the taste of a cake.

7. Hypothesis Contrary to Fact

• Meaning: It is presenting a statement as if it were a factual hypothesis without strong supporting
evidence. It involves speculating a hypothetical situation that contradicts an established fact.

• Fallacy 1 given in the story: “If Madame Curie had not happened to leave a photographic plate in a
drawer with a chunk of pitchblende, the world today would not know about radium."
• Protagonist’s reason for being fallacious: I would like to point out that the statement is a fallacy. Maybe
Madame Curie would have discovered radium at some later date. Maybe somebody else would have
discovered it. Maybe any number of things would have happened. You can't start with a hypothesis that
is not true and then draw any supportable conclusions from it.

• Fallacy 2 given in the story: "That's right. So you do owe me something, don't you, my dear? If I hadn't
come along you would never have learned about fallacies."
• Analysis for being fallacious: The protagonist presents a hypothetical situation that if he hadn’t come
along, Polly would not have grasped the concept of fallacies. This argument is fallacious as it assumes
that Polly's understanding of fallacies hinges solely on the protagonist, disregarding the possibility that
Polly could have acquired this knowledge from other sources.

8. Poisoning the Well

• Meaning: It is an ad hominem attack that attempts to discredit an opponent’s credibility before they have
a chance to present their argument. This creates a negative perception in the audience, leading them to
reject the opponent's stance without objectively evaluating the argument.

• Fallacy 1 given in the story: “Two men are having a debate. The first one gets up and says, 'My
opponent is a notorious liar. You can't believe a word that he is going to say.”
• Protagonist’s reason for being fallacious: The first man has poisoned the well before anybody could
drink from it. He has hamstrung his opponent before he could even start.

• Fallacy 2 given in the story: "You can't go with him, Polly. He's a liar. He's a cheat. He's a rat."
 • Analysis for being fallacious: The protagonist attempts to alter Polly's perception of Petey Bellows by
using negative and offensive language. This is a sample of Poisoning the well because the argument
attacks Petey Bellows’s character to prevent Polly to go out with him.

• Fallacy 3 given in the story: "You're a logician. Let's look at this thing logically. How could you choose
Petey Bellows over me? Look at me--a brilliant student, a tremendous intellectual, a man with an assured
future. Look at Petey--a knot-head, a jitterbug, a guy who'll never know where his next meal is coming
from. Can you give me one logical reason why you should go steady with Petey Bellows?"
• Analysis for being fallacious: This statement attacks Petey Bellows by using terms like "knot-head,"
"jitterbug," and “a guy who'll never know where his next meal is coming from.” The speaker employs
these tactics to attempt to enhance his own appeal to Polly. By demeaning Petey, the speaker aims to
gain an advantage through the promotion of their own positive qualities.

IMPLICIT FALLACIES EXAMPLES:

1. Appeal to Populace or Bandwagon
• Meaning: Also known as the argument ad populum, this fallacy concludes that a premise is true because
a large number of people believe or accept it. It relies on the popularity of a belief or action to deem its
soundness.

• Fallacy 1 given in the story: “I want a racoon coat. All the Big Men on Campus are wearing them.”
• Analysis for being fallacious: This is an implicit fallacy where Petey Bellows desires to own a raccoon
coat because many big men on campus possess them. He underscores his eagerness to own one by
explaining that he spent all his money on textbooks, rendering him unable to afford it. This demonstrates
that his desire to conform to the trend outweighs the practicality of purchasing textbooks for school.

2. False Dilemma or False Dichotomy

• Meaning: It is a fallacy that presents two possible options, when there are possibilities of multiple
conclusions.

• The passage that presents false dilemma: "Would you like it?" "Oh yes!" he cried, clutching the greasy
pelt to him. Then a canny look came into his eyes. "What do you want for it?" "Your girl," I said, mincing
no words. "Polly?" he asked in a horrified whisper. "You want Polly?" "That's right."
• Analysis for being fallacious: This passage is a false dilemma because it offers only two options:
keeping the coat and losing Polly, or rejecting the coat and keeping Polly. It overlooks the possibility that
Polly can make her own decision about who she wants to date.

3. Affirming the Consequent or Converse Fallacy

• Meaning: This fallacy argues that if a conditional statement is true, and the consequent of that statement
is true, then it erroneously concludes that the antecedent must also be true. The structure follows the
pattern: "If A, then B. B is true. Therefore, A is true."

• Fallacy 1 given in the story: “I was well aware of the importance of the right kind of wife in furthering a
lawyer's career. The successful lawyers I had observed were, almost without exception, married to
beautiful, gracious, intelligent women. With one omission, Polly fitted these specifications perfectly.”
• Analysis for being fallacious: According to the observation speaker successful lawyers are married to
beautiful, gracious, intelligent women. Consequently, the speaker assumes that being married to a
woman like Polly, who possesses these qualities, automatically qualifies him as a successful lawyer.

4. Irrelevant Conclusion or Red Herring

• Meaning: The conclusion is not relevant to the provided premise. It diverts attention from the main point,
leading to illogical conclusions.
 • Fallacy 1 given in the story: “One afternoon I found Petey lying on his bed with an expression of such
distress on his face that I immediately diagnosed appendicitis. "Don't move," I said. "Don't take a laxative.
I'll get a doctor."
• Analysis for being fallacious: This is an implicit fallacy where the protagonist assumes that Petey has
appendicitis due to his distressed expression, without proper medical consultation and evaluation.

PRACTICE:

• An argument that can be disproven through reasoning is - Logical fallacy

• Claiming that because one event followed another, it was also caused by it. Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc
• Assuming a relatively small first step will inevitably lead to a chain of related (negative) events. Slippery
Slope
Creating a distorted or simplified caricature of your opponent's argument, and then arguing against that.
straw man
• Presenting two opposing options as the only two options while hiding alternatives. false dilemma
• "I don't want Coke to drink right now." "You're a Pepsi lover?" strawman
• If I lend her snack money today, she is going to expect me to do it every day. She'll probably want my
lunch too. slippery slope
• Using logic is important because it is important to use logic. Circular reasoning
• Oversimplified of and attack on the viewpoint of another or the misrepresentation of the viewpoint of
another. Strawman
• Debbie and Marsha own sports cars. Debbie is an artist so Marsha must be an artist. false analogy
•