Fallacies
▶ Fallacies: Formal and Informal Fallacies
In this video, Paul describes the distinction between formal and informal fallacies. This distinction is useful for understanding the fallacies in Wi-Phi's Critical Thinking section. Speaker: Paul Henne, Duke University
▶ Fallacies: Fallacy of Composition
In this video, Paul Henne describes the fallacy of composition, an informal fallacy that arises when we assume that some whole has the same properties as its parts. He also discusses why there aren't colorless cats. Speaker: Paul Henne, Duke University
▶ Fallacies: Fallacy of Division
In this video, Paul Henne describes the fallacy of division, the informal fallacy that arises when we assume that the parts of some whole must have the same properties as the whole they make up. He also discusses why water molecules aren't wet. Speaker: Paul Henne, Duke University
▶ Fallacies: Introduction to Ad Hominem
In this video, Julianne Chung offers a brief introduction to ad hominem fallacies, or fallacies of personal attack. She surveys six different types (abusive ad hominem, circumstantial ad hominem, tu quoque, guilt by association, genetic fallacy, and ad feminam), offering examples of each along the way. For a more detailed discussion of ad hominem fallacies, please see the video on ad hominem fallacies by Paul Henne. Speaker: Julianne Chung, Yale University
▶ Fallacies: Ad Hominem
In this video, Paul Henne describes the ad hominem fallacy, which is an informal fallacy that arises when someone attacks the person making the argument rather than their argument. He also describes the four subtypes of this fallacy. Speaker: Paul Henne, Duke University
▶ Fallacies: Affirming the Consequent
In this video, Matthew C. Harris explains the fallacy of affirming the consequent, the formal fallacy that arises from inferring the converse of an argument. He also explains why you sometimes cannot conclude that you should bathe in a tub of peanut butter. Speaker: Matthew C. Harris, Duke University
▶ Fallacies: Denying the Antecedent
In this video, Matthew C. Harris explains the fallacy of denying the antecedent, the formal fallacy that arises from inferring the inverse of a conditional statement. He also explains why graduate students might also be humans. Speaker: Matthew C. Harris, Duke University
▶ Fallacies: Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc
In this video, Paul explains the post-hoc-ergo-propter-hoc fallacy. This is an informal fallacy committed when a person reasons that because one event happened after another event, the first event caused the second. He also discusses why it is sometimes hasty to conclude that your cat scratch caused your fever. Speaker: Paul Henne, Duke University
▶ Fallacies: Appeal to the People
In this video, Jordan MacKenzie discusses a type of informal fallacy known as the argumentum ad populum fallacy, or the appeal to the people fallacy. This fallacy occurs when one attempts to establish the truth of a conclusion by appealing to the fact that the conclusion is widely believed to be true. Speaker: Jordan MacKenzie, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
▶ Fallacies: Begging the Question
In this video Matthew C. Harris of Duke University explains the informal logical fallacy called begging the question and the associated concept of circular reasoning. Speaker: Matthew C. Harris, Duke University
▶ Fallacies: Equivocation
Joseph Wu (University of Cambridge) explains the fallacy of equivocation, the fallacy that occurs when the same term is used with different meanings in an argument. Along the way, he discusses whether Miley Cyrus is an exploding ball of gas. Speaker: Joseph Wu, University of Cambridge
▶ Fallacies: Straw Man Fallacy
In this Wireless Philosophy video, Joseph Wu (University of Cambridge) introduces you to the straw man fallacy. This fallacy is committed whenever someone misrepresents an opponent's claim in arguing against it. Speaker: Joseph Wu, University of Cambridge
▶ Fallacies: Slippery Slope
In this Wireless Philosophy video, Joseph Wu (University of Cambridge) introduces you to the slippery slope argument. This argument is that when one event occurs, other related events will follow, and this slippery slope will eventually lead to undesirable consequences. Wu walks us through this rhetorical strategy and shows us how to avoid committing a fallacy.
▶ Fallacies: Red Herring
In this Wireless Philosophy video, Joseph Wu (University of Cambridge) introduces you to the red herring, a rhetorical device and fallacy that is often difficult to spot. A red herring occurs when something is introduced to an argument that misleads or distracts from the relevant issue. Wu walks us through this rhetorical device and shows us how to avoid committing a fallacy.
Lessons after number 3 are reserved for Pro members — unlock the full course and every other one.