Saturday, October 5, 2013
Logical Fallacies
Watch the following video:
http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/thu-june-28-2007/immigrant-disease
Look at the different logical fallacies that you see in the video. Find a video, news article, or interview that has at least one of fallacies depicted in the video. Post a link to your found source, and then name and define the fallacy you noticed in your source.
Post your initial post by Wednesday, October 9th. Post your reply to a classmate by Friday, October 11th.
Your reply should address your classmate's source. Respond by listing at least one additional fallacy your classmate might have missed, and why you think the fallacy should be addressed, or respond by addressing whether or not you believe your classmate has rightly addressed his/her fallacy in his/her source.
As always, stay professional with your classmates.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.cnn.com/2013/10/08/us/vegas-flight-child/index.html?hpt=us_c2
ReplyDeleteThey are begging the question. They are saying that it has to be the gate attendants mess up because the boy slipped past her somehow. But he slipped past every one they are drawing to the conclusion that everyone did their job as intended only because they say that they did. Anyone is going to say they did their job right, the other people were not paying attention to detail as they should have been.
I agree. It makes you think how they did not catch it when they do the head count in the cabin. No one wants to take the blame
DeleteI agee that they are begging the question. I also think there might be some sweeping generlization, because they keep saying the kid has had a troubled past, such as stealing a car. They are applying his troubled past to this circimstance when there could have been a completly different reason why the kid sneaked onto the plane.
Deletehttp://pro.stansberryresearch.com/1304PWAUP2YR/PPSIPA07/?h=true
ReplyDeleteIn this video he used just about every fallacy.
1. Sweeping and Hasty Generalization by using words that assumes the future of America's debt and he made loads of broad claims with no evidence.
2. He used Begging the Question because he treated his opinion as if he had already proved it.
3. False analogy: he exaggerates the similarities in an analogy and ignores key differences.
Believe me all polotics in America are full of fallacies, it is very entertaining, some times they make my day.
DeleteI find it humorous that you say all politics in America are full of fallacies, simply because that sentence is a fallacy.
Deletehttp://admarcomm.wordpress.com/2012/09/22/commercial-vw-laughing/
ReplyDeleteThis commercial use the red herring fallacy, it’s detracting the watchers by having a bunch of laughing people. The commercial doesn’t say much about the actual car. Also it uses, begging the question. It assume that everyone knows what a Volkswagen is, the commercial does not even show the car once in the whole 32 seconds of the video. Not every person on the planet knows what this type of car is just by the logo.
It does seem to be a red herring fallacy but I feel it is more of a bandwagon fallacy. The commercial is trying to give the impression that if you own a VW you would be happier and they are trying to get the audience to jump on board and have the same experience. It could also be a post hoc fallacy. Stating that if you own a VW you would be happy and laughing all the time too or even a sweeping generalization that all people who own a VW are happy and laughing.
Deletehttp://www.cnn.com/2013/10/08/us/georgia-gym-mat-death/index.html?hpt=us_c1
ReplyDeleteI feel in this video that they are begging the question. There saying they already know it was not murder with out investigating more into the case. I think is could also be Hasty Generalization cause they have a good amount of evidence but there not investigating into the evidence further. In part of the video i think there is a little bit of snob appeal cause the Sharif would not talk to them about it any further with a very snobby tone.
In this online news article I don't agree with Courtney about it having being either Begging the question or Hasty Generalization. This is one of those pieces of news that is extremely hard to use with fallacies. I feel like when you are trying to prove a fallacy it has to be with a piece of information that neither party will tend to be bias about. It is hard for me to agree with what Courtney says about the fallacies used b/c to me in no way I see the parents of the victim or the investigators being Hasty or begging the question. I can say that I do get more of an Argument to populum, argument ad hominem from the victim's family and from the investigators and reporters supporting the victims family. I can even pull some post hoc ergo propter hoc, false analogy, and reductive fallacy from the Police department's investigations and their statements. Again I just want to say this is a tricky clip to be un-bias about which do have a lot of weighing on your opinion of what fallacies are being and not being played out.
DeletePatricia Blake~
http://www.history.com/shows/ancient-aliens Just like The Daily Show clip the Discovery Channel's Ancient Aliens produce thier show by begging the question. The episodes are opinionated and are open to question without real proof or twisting evidence to show what they want you to believe. They are also using Non Sequitur by drawing conclusions based on false assuptions.
ReplyDeleteI do not agree with the fact they are begging the question and with it being non-sequitur. because they are never stating a fact it always has a question mark after it. I feel if anything there is a bandwagon approach because they give you the option to believe what they are saying and go along with it
Deletehttp://vimeo.com/68913265
ReplyDeleteHere be dragons on vimeo
Vast majority of the people accept dragons. The unkown becomes simple and satisfactory. Logical fallacies.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeletei have to agree with Robyn, this video jumps around so much if anything were to tie into each other it would be very hard to tell.
Deletehttp://www.jokelibrary.net/xOtherNtoZ/polit/polit-supp2-Simpson12.html
ReplyDeleteThere are a few non-sequiturs in this clip. It jumps around quite a bit at the end and they don't tie into each other.
Yea good example of a non sequitur in this clip "Why do we have to choose our leaders, isn't that what we have the Supreme Court for?". Just because The Supreme Court makes decisions for justice does not mean that their job is to choose who the next president should be. (Side Note: Tho that would make sense, whichever leader is more just. Only a thought)
DeleteThis video has some Post Hoc in it. They assume that because there is a certain disease in America that it was brought by people that aren't America that entered te country at the same time. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mario-livio/logical-fallacies_b_1932906.html
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e4Ts4TtEwDc
ReplyDeleteBacon Club Chalupa Taco Bell Commercial
Similar The Daily Show's episode shown here in this blog, there was hasty generalization in this video. For example, in one part of the video, the commercial makes the generalization that all guys like bacon by having a girl have a bacon club chalupa, saying "All guys love bacon,", and men coming up to her because the chalupa has bacon in it. This is much like The Daily Show when John Hodgman made the hasty generalization that all Mexicans are lepers.
http://www.godlowdown.com
ReplyDeleteHow to Make An Atheists Head Explode (uncensored comments version
In The Daily Show's video non sequitur, hasty generalization, sweeping generalization, and post hoc were the majority of the video. He just went on as if he was the expert in immigrant diseases. The same can be said about the video on how to make an atheists head explode.