PARSING THE PARTISANS
Karl Straub Logical Fallacy Project.
What is a logical fallacy? Here is a partial explanation, taken from the book “Nonsense: A Handbook Of Logical Fallacies,” by Robert J. Gula.
“A fallacy is an error in thinking or reasoning. Strictly speaking, it is not an error in fact or belief. It involves thought process, therefore, it pertains to conclusions, not to the statements that form those conclusions. Furthermore, the word fallacy usually applies to conclusions that appear sound and that are often convincing but are, in fact, incorrect.”
I’m more interested in collecting arguments that are fallacious even though they are proceeding from premises that are wholly or partially accurate. I’m less interested in arguments that are fallacious because they proceed from premises that are themselves suspect.
EXAMPLES.
Fallacious argument proceeding from accurate premise. This is what I’m looking for.
1. Brett Kavanaugh was really angry in his testimony. Thus, he’s innocent.
2. Brett Kavanaugh was really angry in his testimony. Thus, he’s guilty.
I’ve heard both of these arguments. The initial premise (Kavanaugh was angry) is a fact, disputed by nobody. The two conclusions assume you can determine a person’s guilt or innocence by his emotional reaction to allegations. You can’t. (And it’s damn lucky for lawyers that you can’t.)
