Why Is It Lame to Call My Class “Critical Thinking”?
For over twenty-five years, I’ve been teaching a class called “Critical Thinking,” a terrible name for the class. Thinking by definition should be critical. To not think is to be in the zombie state. It is to be mindless, habitual, emotional, reactive, and reflexive. Is there a middle ground where someone is semi-thinking but not at the level of “critical thinking”? I think not. I suppose there are states of Thinking Limbo in which you are “kind of thinking” like when half your brain is focused on your essay and the other half is listening to your Spotify Playlist. But I would argue that multitasking is a bad habit and is not born from thinking.
In contrast, to think is to focus sufficiently to process information and make an informed opinion. The distinction between thinking and not thinking is so obvious that to call my class “Critical Thinking” does nothing to define what the class is or should be about.
So calling my class “Critical Thinking” doesn’t shed light on the class’s objectives; additionally, the distinction between thinking and reacting mindlessly is so obvious as to be both useless and insulting to the students. What is further insulting to students is the lazy, non-critical manner in which the term “Critical Thinking” became many decades ago, probably before I was born, the chosen name of the class. Ironically, calling this class “Critical Thinking” is not very “critical,” if by that term we hope to achieve clarity, insight, and usefulness.
The real focus of this class, therefore, is not “Critical Thinking”; rather, if we look at the course objectives, the course should be called Argumentation and Analysis.
Argumentation is using informed opinions, logic, refutation, and rigorous consideration of opponents’ views to “battle-test” one’s opinions and to present a persuasive argument.
Analysis is breaking down a significant, high-stakes phenomenon into its causes and effects. We break down the reasons behind high-stakes phenomena such as political and cultural polarization, the epistemological crisis (we no longer agree on what is real), the loss of trust in our major institutions, the degradation and moral dissolution resulting from algorithm-driven social media, the resurgence of polio and other diseases that were supposed to be eradicated decades ago, etc.
So for the sixteen weeks, humor me by abstaining from “Critical Thinking Class” and instead saying “Argument and Analysis.” Have a great semester, everyone.
English 1C Syllabus Fall 2022 for Jeffrey McMahon
Classes meet Monday and Wednesday
Sections 6574 (H205 from 10:15-12:20) and 6580 (H214 from 2:15-4:20)
Required Materials:
I have assigned no books for my English 1C class. We read online essays and consume media on Netflix, Amazon Prime, Hulu, etc.
You will write 4 essays in this class. Each essay will be approximately 1,200 words.
Each essay will have two "building block" assignments, usually one or two paragraphs long, which can be used in your essay.
Total Points and Grading
There are a total of 1,000 points for the semester.
- Each 1,200-word essay is worth 200 points for a total of 800 points.
- Each 1,200-word essay is preceded by two smaller building-block assignments that can be used toward your completed essay, such as an introductory paragraph, a thesis paragraph, or a counterargument-rebuttal paragraph.
- There are a total of 8 of these smaller Building Block assignments, and each of these assignments is worth 25 points for a total of 200 points.
What about late essays?
I give you 5 days of grace after the due date. Within 5 days, I take a grade off the essay for being late.
What if you're not happy with your first submitted assignment?
You can use my feedback after your first upload to resubmit an assignment for a better grade.
Why would the instructor initiate a student drop at Week 9?
To learn the writing process, the students are expected to keep up with the material. If students haven't completed the first two essays by Week 9, they are considered inactive and I will drop them.
Grading Point System
900 points is the minimum for an A grade; 800 points for a B; 700 for a C; 600 for a D.
How I Grade Your Completed Essays:
I grade your assignments based on how well you fulfill the course objectives and what are called Student Learning Outcomes. While there are some variations on how I break down the grading based on the type of essay (argumentative, cause and effect, extended definition, comparison and contrast), the grading is more or less the same based on the following model:
Each essay has a maximum 200 points. You earn points through the following:
- A meaningful thesis statement that generates compelling body paragraphs and a strong exposition driven by a distinct writing voice (authorial presence). This thesis produces meaningful content and a powerful writing voice that passes the “So what?” question, meaning that the writing matters, is significant, and elevates the reader to a higher understanding of an urgent topic. 80 points maximum.
- Clear organizational design, also called an expository mode, that has a logical sequence and follows a clear structure. 40 points.
- The use of signal phrases and correct MLA in-text citations whenever you cite paraphrased, summarized, or quoted material. 30 points.
- The essay has sound sentence mechanics, sentence variety, correct spelling, and correct grammar usage suitable for college-level writing. The most common grammar errors students make that diminish their essay grade are comma splices and sentence fragments. 30 points.
- The essay conforms to the updated MLA format for pagination, spacing, and Works Cited page. 20 points.
How I Grade Your Smaller Assignments
These building-block assignments are much smaller and should and can be used to complete your 1,200-word essays. I grade them based on how useful they are to you and how well they conform to the requirements. Most of these smaller assignments are introductory paragraphs, thesis paragraphs, and counterargument-rebuttal paragraphs (if the essay is an argument).
Since the point scheme varies, I will just give you an example of a typical 25-point assignment, which would typically be one paragraph long, sometimes two:
How I Break Down Your Grade for This Assignment of 25 Points
- Clarity and usefulness of your paragraph for establishing the importance of the subject to your reader, 10 points.
- Have sufficient details to establish a meaningful, authentic approach to the subject. A writer never wants to just “go through the motions,” that is to say, deliver a perfunctory effort. Deliver the degree of authenticity and meaning this subject deserves, 10 points.
- Write full sentences and avoid sentence mechanics, spelling, grammar, and punctuation errors. Be especially mindful of avoiding comma splices and sentence fragments, 5 points.
Course Goals:
By "goals," I mean what you should get out of this course so you can be successful in all your college writing classes and any writing endeavors you will have outside of college.
- Build your confidence in writing a claim or a thesis that generates a meaningful essay in your distinct writing voice.
- Be okay with the fact that all of us struggle to get our thoughts clearly on the page, and that we all have to go through the writing process, which more often than not helps us achieve our desired results.
- Build your confidence in integrating credible sources into your essays by mastering the 6 components of signal phrases and in-text citations.
- Be okay with the fact that learning grammar and sentence structure is a long-term process and that there are many online sources, including videos, which can accommodate different types of learning personalities as we try to improve in these areas.
English 1C Course Outcomes and Student Learning Objectives:
- Evaluate arguments in terms of bias, credibility, and relevance.
- Assess an argument's claims by examining assumptions, by differentiating between facts and inferences, by recognizing errors in logic, by analyzing support, and by identifying both explicit and implied conclusions.
- Recognize and assess argumentative claims embedded in literary works, advertisements, political tracts, and presentations in other media.
- Express critical viewpoints and develop original arguments in response to social, political, and philosophical issues and/or to works of literature and literary theory.
- Demonstrate the ability to evaluate electronic sources and databases, to incorporate research from online and print media, and to compose unified, coherent, fully supported argumentative essays that advance their claims by integrating primary and secondary sources, and by employing the tools of critical interpretation, evaluation, and analysis.
Student Learning Outcomes:
Upon completion of this course, students will:
- Compose an argumentative essay that shows an ability to support a claim using analysis, elements of argumentation, and integration of primary and secondary sources.
- Identify and assess bias, credibility, and relevance in their own arguments and in the arguments of others, including primary and secondary outside sources.
- Write an essay that is correct in MLA format, paragraph composition, sentence structure, grammar, spelling, and usage.
Students With Disabilities Resources:
It is the policy of the El Camino Community College District to encourage the full inclusion of people with disabilities in all programs and services. Students with disabilities who believe they may need accommodations in this class should contact the campus Special Resource Center (310) 660-3295, as soon as possible. This will ensure that students are able to fully participate.
Student Resources:
- Reading Success Center (East Library Basement E-36)
- Software and tutors are available for vocabulary development & reading comprehension.
- Library Media Technology Center - LMTC (East Library Basement)
- Computers are available for free use. Bring your student ID # & flash drive. There’s a charge for printing.
- Writing Center (H122)
- Computers are available for free use. Free tutoring is available for writing assignments, grammar, and vocabulary. Bring your student ID & flash drive to save work. Printing is NOT available.
- Learning Resource Center - LRC (West Wing of the Library, 2nd floor)
- The LRC Tutorial Program offers free drop-in tutoring. For the tutoring schedule, go toelcamino.edu/library/lrc/tutoring .The LRC also offers individualized computer adaptive programs to help build your reading comprehension skills.
- Student Health Services
- Student Health Center (Next to the Pool) is closed due to Covid-19.
- The Health Center offers free medical and psychological services as well as free workshops on topics like “test anxiety.” Low cost medical testing is also available.
- Special Resource Center – SRC (Southwest Wing of Student Services Building)
The SRC provides free disability services, including interpreters, testing accommodations, counseling, and adaptive computer technology.
El Camino College Policies on Academic Honesty and Plagiarism:
El Camino College places a high value on the integrity of its student scholars. When an instructor determines that there is evidence of dishonesty in any academic work (including, but not limited to cheating, plagiarism, or theft of exam materials), disciplinary action appropriate to the misconduct as defined in BP 5500 may be taken. A failing grade on an assignment in which academic dishonesty has occurred and suspension from class are among the disciplinary actions for academic dishonesty (AP 5520). Students with any questions about the Academic Honesty or discipline policies are encouraged to speak with their instructor in advance.
Reading and Writing Schedule
August 29: Introduction, Toulmin Structure, Logical Fallacies
August 31: Harriet Brown’s “The Weight of the Evidence”; pathos, logos, ethos, kairos
September 5: Holiday
September 7 James Hamblin’s “Body Weight, Clash of Ideologies” and
Harriet Brown’s “How Weight Loss Became a Disease”
September 12: Derek Thompson’s “Where Does Obesity Come From?” and
Olga Khazan’s “Why Scientists Can’t Agree On Whether It’s Unhealthy to be Overweight”
September 14: Rivka Galchen’s “Bariatric Surgery: The Solution to Obesity?” and Sandra Aamodt’s “Why You Can’t Lose Weight on a Diet”
September 19: Tommy Tomlinson’s “The Weight I Carry,” Julie Beck’s “You Can’t Willpower Your Way to Lasting Weight Loss,” and Tamar Haspel’s “Why ‘Moderation’ Is the Worst Weight-Loss Advice Ever”
September 21: Essay 1 is due on September 24. Introduce Essay 2, Workism and Groupthink. Derek Thompson's essay "The Religion of Workism Is Making Americans Miserable" and Lyman Stone and Laurie DeRose’s “What Workism Is Doing to Parents”
September 26: Anne Helen Petersen, “How Millennials Became the Burnout Generation”
September 28: WeWork documentary on Hulu; Lizzie Widdicombe’s “The Rise and Fall of WeWork,” “The WeWork Documentary Explores a Decade of Delusion,” Laura Bliss’ “How WeWork Has Perfectly Captured the Millennial Id,” and Derek Thompson’s “WeWork’s Adam Neumann Is the Most Talented Grifter of Our Time.”
October 3: The Inventor: Out for Blood in Silicon Valley on HBO via Hulu; Ian Bogost’s “The Wildly Appealing, Totally Doomed Future of Work,” YouTube video: “Elizabeth Holmes Exposed,” YouTube video “How Elizabeth Holmes’ Rhetoric Changed Over Time,” YouTube video “Elizabeth Holmes and the Theranos Deception,” and YouTube video “Elizabeth Holmes: The Valley of Hype”
October 5: Naomi Fry’s YouTube video “Fyre Festival: The World’s Most Infamous Musical Festival--4 Years Later,” and YouTube video “How Fraudsters Become Heroes”
October 10: Sophie Gilbert’s “When Work Is a Terrifying Dystopia,” Naomi Fry’s “‘Severance’ Is Sci-Fi for the Soul,” James Poniewozik’s “‘Severance’ Review: That Makes Two of You,” YouTube video, “The Psychology of Severance,” YouTube video “The Ending of Severance Season 1 Actually Explained,” and YouTube video “Workplace Dystopias Aren’t Just Fiction, They’re Here”
October 12: Erin Griffith's New York Times essay “Why Are Young People Pretending to Love Work?” Toxic Positivity, Spiritual guidance as a smokescreen for Groupthink and conformity, and loneliness feeds Workism.
October 17: Carolyn Chen’s Work, Pray, Code critiques work as the new religion; also see her essay “When Your Job Fills in for Your Faith”
October 19: Essay 2 is due on October 22. Chimera Essay is introduced. We begin with Hasan Minhaj’s Homecoming King.
October 24: “Winter Dreams”; sample thesis statements; comparison essay structures
October 26: White Hot and Good Hair
October 31 Fake Famous (show on HBO via Hulu) and LulaRich: YouTube video: “Why Women Are Quitting Their Side Hustle: Leaving LulaRoe”
November 7: Private Life Roger Ebert review, New York Times review, Atlantic, Guardian, and The Wrap reviews; the Selfishness of the Baby Quest. Review chimera definition.
November 9: Uncut Gems reviews from Roger Ebert, New Yorker, and New York Times; YouTube video “Uncut Gems Explained: Chance, Chaos, and Randomness,” YouTube video “Uncut Gems Ending Explained & Interpretation,” YouTube video “Why Uncut Gems is so Stressful,” YouTube video “Everything Wrong With Uncut Gems in Very Anxious Minutes,” Youtube video: “How the Safdie Brothers Lie in Uncut Gems”
November 14: The Chimera of the High-Tech Lifestyle in the Face of the Recession: Derek Thompson’s “How a Recession Could Weaken the Work-From-Home Revolution” and “The End of the Millennial Lifestyle Subsidy”
November 16: Essay 3 is due on November 19. Go over Essay 4. Read Gustavo Arellano’s “Let White People Appropriate Mexican Food” and watch the YouTube video “Cultural Appropriation Tastes Damn Good”; Ugly Delicious, Tacos and the international evolution.
November 21: Is Taco Bell an argument against Gustavo Arrelano’s claim? What is cultural appropriation? Ugly Delicious, Pizza and the Purity Police.
November 23: Are Priests of Authenticity Going Too Far? Consider the taco stand in Portland. 8 Rules for Writing an Argumentative Thesis; Ugly Delicious, Fried Chicken.
November 28: Supports and counterarguments for Arellano’s claim; legit food innovation vs. flagrant food thievery; “Arellano is 75% right”; Disagreement with Arellano: “From Rick Bayless to Bad Burritos: Cultural Appropriation of Cuisine” (by Jamie Clarke); review major counterarguments. The Sacred Ritual of the Cochinita vs. the Assimilationist American Taco, Netflix’s Taco Chronicles, Volume II, episodes 2 and 4.
November 30: The Gustavo Arellano article: “The Problem Isn’t Rick Bayless Cooking Mexican Food--It’s That He’s a Thin-Skinned Diva.”
(Links to an external site.) and The Tim Carman article “Should White Chefs Sell Burritos? (Links to an external site.)
December 5: Katie Donovan article “Culinary Appropriation”
(Links to an external site.) and Dinner Party Download article “Gustavo Arellano Pushes a Few Buttons and (Links to an external site.) and
Hispanic Food & Culture in LA article “From Rick Bayless to Bad Burritos”
December 7: Matt Gross article “The Cultural Appropriation of Food”
(Links to an external site.); reversing cultural appropriation by giving credit to African-American culinary contributions in the Netflix docuseries High on the Hog. Essay 4 is due on December 16.
December 12: Computer Lab
December 14 Computer Lab
Essay #1 (Essay worth 200 points):
Due as an upload on September 24
Is Losing Weight a Fool’s Errand?
Essay #1 (Essay is worth 200 points):
Due as an upload on September 24
Is Losing Weight a Fool’s Errand?
The Assignment:
In a 1,200-word essay with a minimum of 4 sources, address Harriet Brown’s “The Weight of the Evidence” by supporting, refuting, or complicating the claim that Brown’s essay is too mired in structuralism and learned helplessness to be a persuasive essay.
Different Philosophical Approaches
Structuralist
What is structuralism?
Structuralism argues that society, not the individual, determines a positive outcome. Therefore, when we talk about losing weight and weight management, if we are structuralists, we look at economic injustice, genetics, childbirth, hormones, the availability of cheap calories, and the social ostracism one suffers when rejecting the Western Diet as the main factors that determine how successful we will be with keeping trim and well-conditioned.
On the other hand, the individualist argues that we can engage with the challenge of body weight management by using critical thinking to dissect the logical fallacies that misinform those who would give up on health and a safer society.
A structuralist will want to legislate skinniness by using the law:
- Taxing junk food
- Eliminating soda, donuts, and other junk foods from school
- Having organic food choices or outright free organic food for lunch
- Having organic gardens on school premises
- Teaching organic cooking as part of the school curriculum
- Ordering lower health insurance rates based on Body Mass Index. There are degrees of invasive measures to leverage weight loss in the masses.
- Nutritionists and social workers pay house visits
Biologist
- Genetics
- Set Point
- Hormones
- Circadian rhythms
- Metabolism
- Insulin
- Sleeping habits
- Stress
- Appetite-suppressant drugs and supplementation are the main focus
- Super Tasters
Psychologist
We look at the psychological “reasons we are eating”:
- Substitute for love
- Emotional neediness
- Emotional regression, an infantile tendency to return to the womb through binge-eating
- Eating to distract yourself from the Giant Nothingness that is raging inside you
- Instant gratification
- Self-soothing, self-comfort, and stress relief
- Way to procrastinate doing things we don’t want to do. Why write your college essay when you can sit down to a pot of coffee and a key lime pie?
Sociologist
- Family events center on food
- Celebrations and rites of passage center on food
- Romance centers on food
- To abstain from rich foods at social events is to suffer the ostracism of being a wet blanket
- To abstain from delicious foods is to implicitly condemn others and in effect be a sour-faced, judgmental nincompoop.
Economist
- Buying organic food is expensive
- The more money we have, the more time we have for long-term planning.
- The less money we have, the more we live a provisional existence, eating hand-to-mouth, living in the moment, scraping what we can, and doing whatever we can to stave off food insecurity with little regard to food quality.
Hedonist
Hedonism: The mindless pursuit of pleasure
We are hedonists, which means we believe in reckless disregard for food rules. The point of living is to commit to unlimited pleasures, the more food and flavorful the better. “If I want to eat a box of Krispy Kremes every day, then by God I’ll do so and no one will tell me otherwise.”
Epicurean
The mindful pursuit of pleasure
“I’m going to die so I will take reasonable measures to enjoy food when I can without being stupid about it.”
Stoic (opposite of the structuralist)
Stoicism: Self-denial, self-discipline, and austerity lead us to the path of success and enlightenment.
Blue Zone-Ist
You eat like people in Blue Zones such as the Mediterranean and Okinawa.
Pharmacist
We need to develop the right drug.
Cipher
No moral, intellectual, or philosophical framework to base any of your decisions
What camp do you belong to? Write an argument that defends your position as a structuralist or an individualist in the context of body weight management. Be sure to have a counterargument-rebuttal section.
The Method (Essay Outline):
In paragraph 1, analyze in terms of pathos, logos, and ethos, the points made by Harriet Brown in her essay “The Weight of the Evidence.”
In paragraph 2, your thesis or claim: Based on your knowledge of the challenges of permanent weight loss, should we structuralists or individualists who embrace self-agency, self-responsibility, and finding ways to overcome the challenges of being healthy in the Western Diet, AKA the Standard American Diet (SAD).
In paragraphs 3-6, support your claim using evidence rooted in ethos, logos, and pathos.
In paragraphs 7 and 8, summarize two compelling objections your opponents might have against your argument and counter with two rebuttals.
In paragraph 9, write a dramatic restatement of your thesis to achieve pathos.
Your last page, Works Cited, is in MLA format and has a minimum of 4 credible sources.
How I Grade Your 200-Point Essay
One. The salience and effectiveness of your argument writing with a strong authorial presence and using logos, ethos, and pathos: 100
Two. The integration of signal phrases for quotations, summaries, and paraphrases and correct MLA in-text citations to introduce sources to support your claims: 35
Three. Writing clear, well-structured sentences with correct grammar, punctuation, and spelling: 35
Four. Presenting your manuscript with correct MLA pagination, headers, indent, double-spacing, and MLA Works Cited page with a minimum of 4 credible sources: 30
You can consult the following articles:
Harriet Brown’s “The Weight of the Evidence”
James Hamblin’s “Body Weight, Clash of Ideologies” and
Harriet Brown’s “How Weight Loss Became a Disease”
Derek Thompson’s “Where Does Obesity Come From?” and
Olga Khazan’s “Why Scientists Can’t Agree On Whether It’s Unhealthy to be Overweight”
Rivka Galchen’s “Bariatric Surgery: The Solution to Obesity?” and
Sandra Aamodt’s “Why You Can’t Lose Weight on a Diet”
Tommy Tomlinson’s “The Weight I Carry” and Julie Beck’s “You Can’t Willpower Your Way to Lasting Weight Loss”
Tamar Haspel’s “Why ‘Moderation’ Is the Worst Weight-Loss Advice Ever”
Amanda Mull’s “The Latest Diet Trend Is Not Dieting”
Netflix: "Why Diets Fail," Explained
The Purpose:
Most of us have considered losing weight to increase our health, our body image, and our self-confidence. Most of us have been cautioned not to go on this or that diet but rather to make a healthy “lifestyle change.” Most of us who have gone on diets did lose the desired weight, but we gained it back again, and then some more, just to pour salt into our wounds.
When we consider that most people gain all their weight back, healthy eating can be expensive for those of us on a tight budget, and with all the other disgusting problems in the world, shouldn’t we just shrug our shoulders, throw caution to the wind, sing “Que sera sera, whatever will be will be,” and eat what we please?
But wait. There’s more. What about those of us who suffer from diabetes, metabolic syndrome, neuropathy, and other ailments associated with our being overweight? What about those of us who can’t fit in our pants? Should we give up on the pride, discipline, and self-confidence of controlling our eating and simply surrender to our health problems since our quest is mired in futility? Some of us don’t have the luxury of giving up on our health.
Recognizing Logical Fallacies
Begging the Question
Begging the question assumes that a statement is self-evident when it actually requires proof.
Major Premise: Fulfilling all my major desires is the only way I can be happy.
Minor Premise: I can’t afford when of my greatest desires in life, a Lexus GS350.
Conclusion: Therefore, I can never be happy.
Circular Reasoning
Circular reasoning occurs when we support a statement by restating it in different terms.
Stealing is wrong because it is illegal.
Admitting women into the men’s club is wrong because it’s an invalid policy.
Your essay is woeful because of its egregious construction.
Your boyfriend is hideous because of his heinous characteristics.
I have to sell my car because I’m ready to sell it.
I can’t spend time with my kids because it’s too time-consuming.
I need to spend more money on my presents than my family’s presents because I need bigger and better presents.
I’m a great father because I’m the best father my children have ever had.
Weak Analogy or Faulty Comparison
Analogies are never perfect but they can be powerful. The question is do they have a degree of validity to make them worth the effort.
A toxic relationship is like cancer that gets worse and worse (fine).
Sugar is high-octane fuel to use before your workout (weak because there is nothing high-octane about a substance that causes you to crash and converts into fat and creates other problems)
Free education is a great flame and the masses are moths flying into the flames of destruction. (horribly false analogy)
Ad Hominem Fallacy (Personal Attack)
“Who are you to be a marriage counselor? You’ve been divorced six times?”
A lot of people give great advice and present sound arguments even if they don’t apply their principles to their lives, so we should focus on the argument, not a personal attack.
“So you believe in universal health care, do you? I suppose you’re a communist and you hate America as well.”
Making someone you disagree with an American-hating communist is invalid and doesn’t address the actual argument.
“What do you mean you don’t believe in marriage? What are you, a crazed nihilist, an unrepentant anarchist, an immoral misanthrope, a craven miscreant?”
Straw Man Fallacy
You twist and misconstrue your opponent’s argument to make it look weaker than it is when you refute it. Instead of attacking the real issue, you aim for a weaker issue based on your deliberate misinterpretation of your opponent’s argument.
“Those who are against universal health care are heartless. They obviously don’t care if innocent children die.”
Hasty Generalization (Jumping to a Conclusion)
“I’ve had three English instructors who are middle-aged bald men. Therefore, all English instructors are middle-aged bald men.”
“I’ve met three Americans with false British accents and they were all annoying. Therefore, all Americans, such as Madonna, who contrive British accents are annoying.” Perhaps some Americans do so ironically and as a result are more funny than annoying.
Either/Or Fallacy
There are only two choices to an issue is an over simplification and an either/or fallacy.
“Either you be my girlfriend or you don’t like real men.”
“Either you be my boyfriend or you’re not a real American.”
“Either you play football for me or you’re not a real man.”
“Either you’re for us or against us.” (The enemy of our enemy is our friend is everyday foreign policy.)
“Either you agree with me about increasing the minimum wage, or you’re okay with letting children starve to death.”
“Either you get a 4.0 and get admitted into USC, or you’re only half a man.”
Equivocation
Equivocation occurs when you deliberately twist the meaning of something in order to justify your position.
“You told me the used car you just sold me was in ‘good working condition.’”
“I said ‘good,’ not perfect.”
The seller is equivocating.
“I told you to be in bed by ten.”
“I thought you meant to be home by ten.”
“You told me you were going to pay me the money you owe me on Friday.”
“I didn’t know you meant the whole sum.”
“You told me you were going to take me out on my birthday.”
“Technically speaking, the picnic I made for us in the backyard was a form of ‘going out.’”
Red Herring Fallacy
This fallacy is to throw a distraction in your opponent’s face because you know a distraction may help you win the argument.
“Barack Obama wants us to support him but his father was a Muslim. How can we trust the President on the war against terrorism when he has terrorist ties?”
“You said you were going to pay me my thousand dollars today. Where is it?”
“Dear friend, I’ve been diagnosed with a very serious medical condition. Can we talk about our money issue some other time?”
Slippery Slope Fallacy
We go down a rabbit hole of exaggerated consequences to make our point sound convincing.
“If we allow gay marriage, we’ll have to allow people to marry gorillas.”
“If we allow gay marriage, my marriage to my wife will be disrespected and dishonored.”
Appeal to Authority
Using a celebrity to promote an energy drink doesn’t make this drink effective in increasing performance.
Listening to an actor play a doctor on TV doesn’t make the pharmaceutical he’s promoting safe or effective.
Tradition Fallacy
“We’ve never allowed women into our country club. Why should we start now?”
“Women have always served men. That’s the way it’s been and that’s the way it always should be.”
Misuse of Statistics
Using stats to show causality when it’s a condition of correlation or omitting other facts.
“Ninety-nine percent of people who take this remedy see their cold go away in ten days.” (Colds go away on their own).
“Violent crime from home intruders goes down twenty percent in a home equipped with guns.” (more people in those homes die of accidental shootings or suicides)
Post Hoc, Confusing Causality with Correlation
Taking cold medicine makes your cold go away. Really?
The rooster crows and makes the sun go up. Really?
You drink on a Thursday night and on Friday morning you get an A on your calculus exam. Really?
You stop drinking milk and you feel stronger. Really? (or is it a placebo effect?)
Non Sequitur (It Does Not Follow)
The conclusion in an argument is not relevant to the premises.
Megan drives a BMW, so she must be rich.
McMahon understands the difference between a phrase and a dependent clause; therefore, he must be a genius.
Whenever I eat chocolate cake, I feel good. Therefore, chocolate cake must be good for me.
Bandwagon Fallacy
Because everyone believes something, it must be right.
“You can steal a little at work. Everyone else does.”
“In Paris, ninety-nine percent of all husbands have a secret mistress. Therefore adultery is not immoral.”
