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)
For this article I used a video from the CNN Youtube page found here.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WSPT2lUaMA0
While there are many logical fallacies in this video here are two I would like to point out.
At 0:45 in the video we see a parent giving a false analogy. Making the claim we need to protect the rights of the majority over the minority.
Randy Thomasson at a 1:37 attempts an appeal to fear when he says this will allow boys to enter girl restrooms and locker-rooms. Not only is highly suspect but he does not dare speak of the reverse.
DeleteAllison NewlenOctober 9, 2013 at 6:06 PM
I think that portion around 1:37 points out some huge lack of thinking on the part of people in general. How could you not make the connection between the transgender laws and bathrooms in the schools. If you allow a law allowing a transgender child to use the bathroom and locker rooms of choice, you are basically allowing children to use facilities intended for the opposite physical gender. It has many similarities to homophobia.
Alexis, you picked a great clip for your post.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete
ReplyDeleteKevinOctober 9, 2013 at 6:09 PM
I saw this commercial years ago and noted many fallacies with it. The main fallacy I see is they are using the Red Herring technique. They are using humor in the thought that TV rots your brain. We all know that is true. They then throw the curve ball (Red Herring) in that it is now available on the computer and there is nothing you can o about it. The second fallacy is in the beginning he states he is on TV so we must believe him (everything is true on the internet).
Here is the link:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=1m71m-LBqFQ
For this I used a clip from a show that almost always has logical fallacies built in, South Park
ReplyDeletehttp://www.southparkstudios.com/clips/104382/blowing-smoke
The main fallacies in this video are at the end in which the girl says that if you smoke you could grow up to be a loser or even dead.
Watching this clip of South Park defiantly took me back to elementary school. I know they were looking out for our best interests (sometimes), but it was always done horribly.
DeleteOne more fallacy I found that was in the same context as yours was the fact they suddenly bring up abortion and AIDS as if these are somehow related to smoking. Last time I checked even if smoking is bad for your health it does not cause abortions.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nm7qgEydGDw
ReplyDeleteGun control is one of my favorite topics, especially for fallacies. Regardless of what one's position is on gun control, there are many thinking errors on the part of both sides of the argument. One of the most common is that criminals will eventually obey the laws if we put them in place.
I totally agree with you! It is crazy how people feel that it's the gun that makes the criminal. Almost the same as blaming forks for making people fat. It's too bad that they can't address the real problem.
DeleteFor my video I did it on abortion:
ReplyDeletehttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U3jDqhS52ns
In the video they said the baby would not be breathing when it gets sucked out of the women which is not all the time true.
The padded playground syndrome is one of my favorite logical fallacies. The thought that because kids play they will all get hurt is ridiculous. This middle school has taken away all 'hard' balls to keep kids from getting seriously injured. The students are only allowed to play with soft nerf balls during recess. Also, cartwheels and games of tag are off limits unless closely supervised by an adult. It will never be possible to protect all children from all injuries. What is next? Should we wrap all of the children in bubble wrap before they leave the house?
ReplyDeletehttp://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/10/09/new-york-school-reportedly-bans-balls-tag-during-recess/
Kids learn as much from getting hurt playing as they do actually playing the games. The games teach them rules, injuries teach them consequences, from which they should learn how to think ahead. There isn't a parent out there that would like to just wrap their kids in bubble wrap to keep them from getting hurt.
DeleteMany schools have eliminated PE due to lawsuits. This world is so sue happy it is affecting our kids. Many children are so sheltered these days and have no clue about the real world. I think I came home at least twice a week from school with a new bruise and no one called the police on the school. Nowadays more people are aware of abuse and will report anything in fear of not doing anything. This is done without regards to the child or the others affected.
Deletehttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8cBn7ok8pCw#t=240
ReplyDeleteThe fallacy I picked from the video in the blog and found in the video I chose was the argument from ignorance. It's astounding how many people will accept or agree with something just because someone says it's true.
This comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteFrom the comments section of the video: "14 out of 20 people we asked at the University of Texas supported the draconian measure, emphasizing once again how the majority of the general public will accept almost any nanny state measure no matter how ludicrous."
DeleteThis statement is clearly a hasty generalization. This is not an extrapolation of larger data, it is a population of 20. Of those 20 people, 14 said they would support the measure. That is not enough evidence for correlation.
If presented properly, people will buy into just about anything. If you can get a petition started, you can get signatures on it just making an argument sound reasonable. The argument for the petition in this video rates with passing a law that we must require people to take a parenting class before having a baby. While there are enough humans to make a good argument for that, it is unreasonable.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThe immigrant disease skit portrays an erroneous authority’s presented argument that is full of numerous logical fallacies. The overall argument is based on an appeal to fear. This same tactic is used in many political campaign ads. I chose this one as an example:
ReplyDeletehttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oz1aLR05eb8
In this video, scary music is playing in the background, and clips of Romney’s speeches are inserted without context. The video presents conclusions about what will happen if Romney wins the election: global warming will be ignored, college aid will be slashed, the middle class will be decimated, etc. In the video, the subject is quickly switched from conclusion to conclusion, offering no evidence to back up any of them. This leaves no room for the audience to build their own conclusions, which is typical of a campaign ad. They do not tell you the facts, but rather tell you how to think.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mlVrkiCoKkg
ReplyDeleteThis is a video about CrossFit., The second statement from a young man defines the premise of the video: "CrossFit is a lifestyle in which you are prioritizing your health. The ability to do many different things at a high level of intensity."
The video contains comments from participants that do not address the stated premise. The first interviewee remarked "I think it's the absolute best way to help you reach your fitness goals." Later, two more remarks state "It's my outlet, I love it. It's my passion. It's commitment. CrossFit is a sport now," and "CrossFit gave me that something extra that I kind of needed in life." This is shifting the issue, the participants are excellently describing what they like about CrossFit, but they are not mentioning anything about how CrossFit prioritizes health or improves the ability to do many exercises.
This is a common theme in many of these fitness schemes. They will show no clinical studies, or even doctors advocating the process. They happy people (actor portrayals), or even compensated (paid) participants. This technique makes you feel that it can happen to you, but as always "results will vary" and "do not expect these results."
DeleteGood point John, the commercial kind of beats around the bush. Might there be an element of a bandwagon argument as well? 37 seconds into the video, a man narrates "When you come here to CrossFit gym, everybody knows your name, everybody loves you..." assuming the audience's desire to be an insider in that sort of community, and appealing to that desire.
Deletehttp://youtu.be/4NFzEW8rSWc
ReplyDeletethis Allstate commercial used slight humor and fear for the fallacies.
You laugh at the fact that a grown man is claiming to be a raccoon but that is what gets your attention. You hear him name off the damage he has done to the attic and you start to see the bigger picture, and you start thinking if this happened to us would we have to pay for it under out house insurance plan. it makes you fear that if they did ever happen with your house insurance (if its not Allstate) then you will end up paying a big sum of cash to get it fixed and they resolve the problem by making Allstate seem like the best option.