Chapter V: Fallacies

I. Fallacies of Induction 235

1. The number of specific instances relied upon to support
the conclusion should be determined 235

2. The class of persons, events, or things about which the
induction is made should be scrutinized with a view to
determining whether it is homogeneous 236

3. Whether or not the specific instances cited in support of
the conclusion are fair examples should be determined 236

4. A search should be made for exceptions to the rule stated
by the induction 237

5. The induction should be examined with a view to
determining its reasonableness 237

II. Fallacies of Deduction 238

1. Material fallacies 238

2. Logical fallacies 239

(1) The undistributed middle 239

(2) The illicit process 244

(3) Irrelevancy of the premises, or ignoring the question 245

A. The appeal to passion, prejudice, or humor 246

B. The personal attack upon an opponent 246

C. The personal attack upon the person or persons
concerned in the controversy 246

D. The appeal to custom and tradition 247

E. Shifting ground 248

F. Refuting an argument which has not been advanced 248

G. Arguing on a related proposition 248

(4) Begging the question 249

A. Arguing in a circle 249

B. Directly assuming the point at issue 250

C. Indirectly assuming the point at issue 251

III. Fallacies of Causal Relation 252

1. Fallacies of the argument from effect to cause 252

(1) Mistaking coincidence for cause 253

(2) Mistaking an effect for a cause 254

(3) Mistaking a subsequent cause for a real cause 254

(4) Mistaking an insufficient cause for a sufficient cause 255

2. Fallacies of the argument from cause to effect 255

3. Fallacies of the argument from effect to effect 256

IV. Fallacies of the Argument from Analogy 256

CHAPTER VI

REFUTATION

I. Revealing a Fallacy 261

II. Reductio ad Absurdum 262

III. The Dilemma 263

IV. Residues 265

V. Inconsistencies 267

VI. Adopting an Opponent’s Evidence 268