Quite a few suffer from being over-abstract and heavily philosophical. Some have difficult-to-grasp examples. Sometimes these fallacies are so simple, or basic maybe, that they're actually hard to grasp mentally. An interactive list of logical fallacies & rhetorical devices with everyday examples. Now in nine languages. Floss that brain. Never be duped. Rhetological Fallacies – Information Is Beautiful. A brain-blending categorisation and visualisation of errors and manipulations of rhetoric and logical thinking. Rhetorical techniques and logical fallacies. Both are used heavily by institutional p.


Author: Rosemarie Mraz
Country: Oman
Language: English
Genre: Education
Published: 7 April 2015
Pages: 264
PDF File Size: 45.10 Mb
ePub File Size: 11.3 Mb
ISBN: 592-6-40792-914-1
Downloads: 99948
Price: Free
Uploader: Rosemarie Mraz


Rhetological Fallacies [INTERACTIVE]

Most of what Andy Busch claimed in his call to Congress is rhetological fallacies the record. Take a look if you want to have a laugh at the Republican prediction machine.

The inflationistas in particular seem to want respect for their weak arguments which would affect the lives of millions, and pretend that disrespect for rhetological fallacies arguments is desrespect for them.

An infographic covering different logical fallocies When Published Aprilaccording to the graphic Where Located here.

Rhetological Fallacies [INTERACTIVE] — Information is Beautiful

Relevance fallacies[ edit ] Appeal to the stone argumentum ad lapidem — dismissing a claim as absurd without demonstrating proof for its absurdity. In the general case any logical inference based on fake arguments, intended to replace rhetological fallacies lack of real arguments or to replace implicitly the subject of the discussion.

See also irrelevant conclusion. Ad hominem — attacking the arguer instead of the argument. Circumstantial Ad Hominem - stating that the arguers personal situation or perceived benefit from advancing a conclusion means that their conclusion is wrong.

Kafka-trapping — A sophistical and unfalsifiable form of argument that attempts to overcome an opponent by inducing a sense of guilt and using the opponent's denial of rhetological fallacies as further evidence of guilt.

Traitorous critic fallacy ergo decedo, 'thus leave' — a critic's perceived affiliation is portrayed rhetological fallacies the underlying reason for the criticism and the critic is asked to stay away from the issue altogether. Easily confused with the association fallacy "guilt by association"below.


Appeal to authority argument from authority, argumentum ad verecundiam — an assertion is deemed true because of the position or authority of the person asserting it.

Appeal to accomplishment — an assertion is deemed true or false based on the accomplishments of the proposer. Courtier's reply — a criticism is dismissed by claiming that the critic lacks sufficient knowledge, credentials, or training to credibly comment on the subject matter.

Appeal to consequences argumentum ad consequentiam — the conclusion is rhetological fallacies by a premise that asserts positive or negative consequences from some course of action in an attempt to rhetological fallacies from the initial discussion. Pooh-pooh — dismissing an argument perceived unworthy of serious consideration.

Appeal to novelty argumentum novitatis, argumentum ad antiquitatis — a proposal is claimed to be superior or better solely because it is new or modern.

Literature Review 2: Rhetological Fallacies -

Opposite of appeal to wealth. Argumentum ad baculum appeal to the stick, appeal to force, appeal to threat — an argument made through coercion or threats rhetological fallacies force to support position.


This fallacy relies on the implied expertise of the speaker or on an unstated truism. The assumption that if the origin of rhetological fallacies idea comes from a biased mind, then the idea itself must also be a falsehood.

Rhetological Fallacies – Information Is Beautiful |

Rhetological fallacies World problems are a subset of this fallacy. This is the inverse of the naturalistic fallacy. Naturalistic fallacy — inferring evaluative conclusions from purely factual premises [96] [97] in violation of fact—value distinction.

In an appeal to tradition, the rhetological fallacies opposes change simply because it is a departure from established practices.