Understanding Various Types of Logical Fallacies
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 30 июл 2024
- The best way to read logical fallacies is to familiarize yourself with the different types so that they can be easily identified when reading. If you’re unsure of what a logical fallacy is or what the most common types are, you can check out our video: Reading Logical Fallacies. Today, I’ll be going a little deeper into the subject with more examples and tips on how to read for logical fallacies in literature.
Check out our online test prep courses! www.mometrix.com/university
For more resources on this topic, go to: www.mometrix.com/academy/unde...
Watch our English review playlist! • English Review
Mometrix Study Guides: www.mometrix.com
Mometrix Flashcards: www.flashcardsecrets.com/
More Test Prep Resources: www.mometrix.com/academy
Follow Mometrix Academy on Pinterest: / mometrixacademy
#mometrixacademy #mometrixenglish #writing #logicalfallacy #logicalfallacies #fallacy #fallacies #arguments #comprehension #english #englishcomprehension #reading #readingcomprehension
Check out our online test prep courses! www.mometrix.com/university
0:30 Circular reasoning
1:21 Hasty Generalization
2:29 Slippery Slope
3:42 Straw Man
4:49 Ad Hominem
5:53 False dichotomy
6:44 Appeal To Emotion
7:16 Equivocation/doublespeak
8:08 Bandwagon
thank you!
I know I'm a bit late but you forgot false analogy at 8:28 cause I was looking for it in your timestamp
Thank you.
This helped me understand fallacies so much better, thank you!
You're welcome. We also have excellent study materials on our website at www.mometrix.com.
Very easy to understand and informative. Thank you.
Thanks alot...
This video helped me to internalize all the fallacies from the last video
The Lady in the video is charming (A)+She has mastered Philosophy (B) => Every single Person who has mastered Philosophy is charming! Whatever the type of fallacy (sounds like an overgeneralisation, though), the video is really useful and well designed and presented! Thank you!!!
Great video! I wonder how many logical fallacies we fail to notice on a daily basis.
We are glad you liked it! We also have great study materials for specific exams on our website at www.mometrix.com.
Are there any books you guys can suggest to understand these even more or how to properly apply them?
I enjoy (usually as a bystander, unless asking questions) listening and reading about the contraversial stuff. So this is a pretty awesome lesson to learn in i hope becoming a better critical stinker.
Thankyou for making this great and clear video.
I hope everyone who benefits from this video is using this to wipe out any cloud in conversation but not pointing finger at others! I believe we are better than that :)
Thank you so much
Good, easy-to-grasp examples.
We are glad you enjoyed the video. Be sure to check out our website as well at www.mometrix.com.
Excellent overview of some major logical fallacies. A must see for everyone.
Love these videos!
Thanks alot ,indeed!!
Thank you for the video short, sweet, and to the point. It was easy to understand and comprehend.
You're welcome! We are glad you enjoyed it. Don't forget to check out our website at www.mometrix.com when you need study materials for a specific exam.
Absolutely well done! In this age to see such amazing and meaningful content is a blessing. Keep it up.
If possible, could anyone explain "paradox" and "reductio ad absurdum" please? Are these logical fallacies too?
This was insightful
Amazing class👍
That's great! Be sure to check out our website as well at www.mometrix.com.
This vid was so helpful
Thank you so much 💞
You are welcome! Don't forget to check out our website at www.mometrix.com when you need study materials for a specific exam.
Lots of love and respect..🌸🌸🌸🌸 Nice Video. Thanks.
You're welcome. Don't forget to check out our website as well at www.mometrix.com.
really good, it deserves more views.
Thanks. We also have great study materials for specific exams on our website at www.mometrix.com.
Love you guys
Thanks
Is Appeal to Emotion & Appeal to Pity same?
hey there, really enjoyed the video - would love to get these as audio only, are you on audea?
Anither great video. I may have to have my 8.5 year old listen to this.
In the Ad Hominum part, is option C an example of a False Analogy/Non-sensical comparison?
I think it's just Andy being fed up that he is being told something completely obvious
Something that sometimes happens to me is that when someone cooks something that looks and/or smells good, I say "That looks good", or "That smells good", but the one who cooked it replies almost as if correcting me saying "It IS good". As if I was saying that it only smells or looks good but probably doesn't taste good. That always annoys me and I can't understand how someone's logic can be so twisted to assume that I'm saying it doesn't taste good just because I say it looks/smells good. Can someone give me some insight on this? or if you respond like this, please explain!
Ever thought they're not being saying that to correct you or suggest otherwise, but to make a light-hearted, funny statement? That's why I would do it.
If you took it literally, then I'd think you don't understand my sense of humour.
Thats completely normal dude
Unless the one saying it got real mad at you lol
I guess it depends of how it's said. It can be funny, it can also make the other person sound like an arse.
I appreciate this video. Thank you for making it.
I think that 'appeal to emotion' and 'bandwagon appeal' are not necessarily fallacies depending on how they are used.
For instance, if some product (um, let's say your videos) earns a dominant market share, there is a good chance that this product is good in itself though there are usually multiple factors in gaining market shares.
You're welcome. We also have great study materials for standardized exams on our website at www.mometrix.com.
Your example does not contain any of those fallacies though.
She killed that. Great way to study for my final!
We love hearing from happy users! We also have great study materials on our website at www.mometrix.com!
thanks lv u
You are beautiful and a good teacher.
We indians being indians 😂🤣
@@sameerparihar1279 You, Sir, just committed an Over Generalization
@@vedantiyangar151 yeah that's inductive reasoning 😎
Better go with the muffin recipes, Susan!!!! Wowww....girl u have tremendous elocution
Thanks, you helped me to initiate my understanding of different political ideologies in the political spectrum 🍺
Btw you missed the trending "nutpicking" fallacy,
Fodder for compilation videos 😅
No True Scotsman would ever make a logical fallacy :)
This made my day. 😂
I wish political debates, ads and the news media would be required to avoid logical falacies. 3 strikes and your out.
Me: I want to play golf
Wife: You clearly prefer golf to spending time with your family
I can't wait to tell her this is a fallacious straw man argument! She'll now feel better about my golfing knowing that she is wrong.
and it's appeal to emotion
In my case, her argument would not be an argument at all, but a statement of fact.
@@Raven.flight 😂 I'm getting there too!
👍👍
One fallacy you overlooked is the Texas Sharpshooter Fallacy.
2:06 From what you originally said the magazine’s claim was, it doesn’t appear that it was discouraging other diets. Rather, it was simply stating everyone should be on a vegetarian diet. It was only a hasty generalization because it didn’t use a significant source of mechanistic data to come to that conclusion. If it did, we would find that humans are biologically more inclined toward a vegan/vegetarian diet.
Thanks ur videos was really helpful but I wanna tell u that u look like MANDY MOORE from the movie A WALK TO REMEMBER.....
What’s her name
I'm sorry but we don't share personal information. We do hope you enjoyed the video.
Mometrix Academy it’s for a good reason I just need her first name
.
"Mathematics has the completely false reputation of yielding infallible conclusions. Its infallibility is nothing but identity. Two times two is not four, but it is just two times two, and that is what we call four for short. But four is nothing new at all. And thus it goes on and on in its conclusions, except that in the higher formulas the identity fades out of sight."
(Johann Wolfgang Von Goethe)
If only this was taught to kids early on! There might be a lot less STUPIDITY out there, since humanity seems to be predisposed to LYING.
Agreed. Everyone just wants to send like they're so intelligent and in the right. No matter at what cost. So entitled.
@@erickpalacios8904 Some more than others.
@@erickpalacios8904 What a strange, unfocussed, overgeneralised observation.
American Heritage has “straw man” as: “ An argument or opponent set up so as to be easily refuted or defeated.
An insubstantial concept, idea, endeavor or argument, particularly one deliberately set up to be weakly supported, so that it can be easily knocked down; especially to impugn the strength of any related thing or idea.”
Your definition and example reflect neither of these definitions.
Like buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo is grammatically correct but people will get confused
No it isn't. 'Buffalo buffalo, Buffalo buffalo buffalo, buffalo Buffalo buffalo' is correct.
More correctly these are to be called RHETORICAL fallacies. Logic, like mathematics, is a formal system in which propositions are either syntactically well-formed or not, mutually consistent or contradictory, complete or incomplete.
There is NO CONCEPT of fallacy in logic. Fallacies have to do with aspects of the world which are brought in to support or refute an argument more generally. For example, the "ad hominem" fallacy tries to refute an argument by suggesting that the person making it is somehow disqualified. This is not an appeal to logic at all, and so it is with all the other few dozen fallacies.
Therefore please do not call them LOGICAL fallacies! There is no such thing.
fallacy means false. There is such thing as false logic. Anything that claims to be something that it isnt is false, so any argument that claims to be a logical argument is a fallacy
@@williampennjr.4448 Logical fallacies don't tell us that a conclusion is false. They simply tell us that the particular instance of reasoning used to reach that conclusion is fallacious and unreliable.
The bigger problem with this video is that her example of an ad hominem ISN'T an ad hominem.
@@ptolemyauletesxii8642 its true that a fallacious argument isn't necessarily wrong about its conclusion, but If one uses a fallacious argument but they turn out to be right about their conclusion it isn't because their argument was right, but in spite of it.
If someone tell me Hitler was evil because he wore a weird mustache, there argument is fallacious but they aren't wrong about Hitler being evil.
@@williampennjr.4448 Isn't that more or less what I said?
Great vid, thanks, but your second example at 2:15 (vegetarian diet) was for the most part factually incorrect. Though the term "vegetarian" is outdated (it's now more properly referred to as "whole foods plant-based"), the human species is biologically herbivorous who only opportunistically "practices" omnivorism. Unfortunately, the more they "practice," the worse their long-term health becomes. This has been thoroughly established by the work of nutrition scientists over the last 50 years of rigorous, peer-reviewed studies as described in Dr. T. Colin Campbell's books, "The China Study," and "Whole."
We're not herbivorous, don't lie to try to make everyone more like you. And if you knew anything about human history you'd know many healthy people throughout history have been omnivores.
@@MetaKnight964 Actually, biologically speaking, humans _are_ herbivorous. Many of us _practice_ omnivorism, but it is against our nature. This is not even an argument; it is a scientific fact.
@@MetaKnight964 Also, 'yes,' there are always outliers or "special cases" where people who consumed an omnivorous diet lived longer than most, but they're just anecdotal evidence. _Statistically_ speaking, people live longer, healthier lives the less animal protein they consume. One has to wonder the quality of life of the long-lived omnivores and how much longer and better a life they may have lived had they avoided animal proteins.
@@donmak0427 I'm a vegan, but you've just committed an appeal to nature fallacy. Ironic...
@@ptolemyauletesxii8642 I don't see how. I backed up my original premise with reference to "The China Study," by Dr. T. Colin Campbell. So, I'm *not* appealing to nature, but to science. Unless I'm missing something.
There being other diets that are just as healthy as a vegetarian diet is not a logical fallacy. Its just plain wrong