You need to make sure that when you are writing, particularly when you're writing persuasive pieces, that you use strong evidence. There are a lot of different types of evidence, but you have to avoid fallacies. Fallacies are agruments that seem reasonable on the surface, but they are actually built on an underlying mistake. Check out this chart.
| Logical Argument (good) | Logical Fallacy (bad) |
1. Observation. If you've seen something, it makes it pretty likely to be true. So, if you went to school at a grade school that required uniforms, you can describe your observations about whether or not uniforms work. So, your observation of Oedipus' behavior backed by quote fragments are legitimate arguments. |
Just because you observe something once doesn't mean that it's always true. Making a conclusion too quickly without seeing enough examples is called Hasty Generalization. It's like saying, "I saw one teen use drugs, so they must all use drugs." On this paper, just because you show Oedipus doing one thing wrong doesn't make him evil. |
2. Cause and Effect. You can explain the logical consequences of some action. So, if the school you went to started using uniforms and kids got into fewer fights, that's a logical argument. If you can logically convince me that a cause and effect happened in one place, you can argue that the same cause will create the same effect again. So, when you're looking at what Oedipus' behavior caused versus what other people caused, make sure you have a true cause and effect. |
If the school had a new principal with new rules at the same time, the rules and not the uniforms caused the change and you've created a Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc fallacy. It's like saying there was flu in Bagdad right after the United States bombed them; therefore, the bombs caused the flu (don't laugh.. that was published in some Iraqui papers). If you can show cause and effect with Oedipus' crimes, you can use that, but make sure that one event actually CAUSED another. |
3. Expert Testimony. You can quote an expert in the field. So, if you can find a principal or a researcher who supports your position, you can quote them. Can you find professors who've written papers on Oedipus and punishment? |
If your expert isn't an expert (say, you're quoting your mother or a random student), you've created an Appeal to False Authority. So, telling me that Bill Cosby thinks Jello is the best isn't the same as a nutritionist saying it. So, you CAN'T use student opinions or papers |
4. Comparison. Compare two similar items and you can prove one by proving the other. So, if you're trying to prove uniforms won't work at our school, you might show how similar Greenway is to another school where uniforms failed. Prove that two things are similar in most ways, you can convince me that you are similar in other ways. Can you compare what Oedipus did to something in modern terms? Can you compare his punishments to other literature or the news? |
If the two items you're comparing aren't similar enough, then you can't make an argument comparing them. Trying to compare two dissimilar items is called False Analogy. It's like saying that horse drawn buggies are just like cars because they're both transportation, so if one causes polution, the other does too. When you compare Oedipus' crimes to others' crimes, make sure you create an analogy I can believe, so no comparing him to Jeffery Dahmer |
5. Prediction. Make a prediction about where an action will logically lead us. Talk about what would happen IF and then show me either how the world would have suffered or how the world would have been better, depending on the choice. Make a prediction about what might have happened if Antigone *hadn't* buried her brother and use evidence to show that prediction is logical. |
Slippery Slope is when you say one thing will lead to another which will lead to another and that would be a horrible outcome. The fallacy part comes when the steps don't logically connect. If you drop out of high school you'll never get a good job and you'll end up digging ditches and doing drugs on the weekend. Hmmmm, that might not be technically true. So, make sure you use evidence to show your prediction is true or at least plausible. |
| 6. Counter your Opponent. You must have one paragraph where you bring up the opponents point of view and then carefully explain why your opponents are wrong. By countering their beliefs, you show the opposition that you've acknowledged that they do have a point and you understand their point. However you must then counter that argument with reasons why you're side is better/stronger/more logical. | Sometimes a writer tries to make the opponent look silly so it's easier to knock him down. This is called a Strawman argument and is one of the worst fallacies. If you're arguing against the death penalty, and you say something like... "Those in favor of the death penalty just like killing, and that's wrong." Um... NO. Those in favor of the death penalty believe it's the only punishment which protects society and provides a fair punishment for the most heinous criminals. You've tried to make the other side look pathetic, and that's a strawman argument. Respect the other side by bringing up objections that fairly represent their views... right before you prove their view wrong. |
Logical Fallacies.info
The Nizkor Project-Fallacies
Logical Fallacies and the Art of Debate
Stephen's Guide to Logical Fallacies
Label the following as
A) Hasty Generalization
B) Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc
C) Appeal to False Authority
D) False Analogy
E) Slippery Slope
F) Strawman
G) A Legitimate Argument
1. I was doing really bad this year. Then my mom gave me this teddy bear and I won my next three races. That's my good luck bear!
2. The Senate has to vote this down. We can't raise taxes .5%! The next thing you know, we'll be raising taxes 3 or 4%!
3. I'm buying those shoes from Fila, the ones Grant Hill endorsed. If they're good enough for him, they'll work for me to play a quick game of pick-up on the corner.
4. People who support the death penalty don't even feel guilty about murdering people. In fact, they support the idea that the state should kill people.
5. If we raise taxes, we aren't addressing the real problem. We need to look at rising expenses. If we don't address the underlying problem, we could raise taxes .5% today, but if we don't address the fact that construction costs have doubled, we're going to have to raise taxes 3 or 4% over the next year.
6. I had a blast on vacation. I really wish I could have spent more time in England, but it's really expensive over there, so one week was all I could afford. The only thing that I didn't like was their driving. Oh man, I was out in the country one day, and I saw two accidents, and my bus driver scared the crap out of me. The drivers in London are okay, but the drivers in the English countryside are just nuts.
7. Students are like nails. Sometimes you just have to hit them in the head to get them to do what they're supposed to do.
8. If we pass laws against fully-automatic weapons, then it won't be long before we pass laws on all weapons, and then we will begin to restrict other rights, and finally we will end up living in a communist state. Thus, we should not ban fully-automatic weapons.
Key: 1B, 2E, 3C, 4F, 5G, 6A, 7D, 8E
     |
|
Last Updated on 7-10-2007 |