Logical Fallacies
The field of apologetics is not just concerned with presenting arguments in favour of our case and against the opposition but it is essential to hook the arguments with the case in an appropriate manner. Sometimes, the arguments themselves hit suicide goal because of logical fallacies. It is vital for every believer to learn logical fallacies.
Whenever you make an argument that is based on reasoning
which is flawed, beneath and beyond the premise, flawed observation, weak
analysis, faulty generalization, adopting rumors, concluding from small sample,
linking together unassociated topics, disordered sequences, and irrelevant premises
then it is called logical fallacy. Using logical fallacies makes you a
self-destructive agent against your own case even though your case may have
strong evidences.[1] It
is a kind of ‘म ताक्छु मुढो, बन्चरो ताक्छ घुँदो’ in our typical Nepali premise.
There are two forms of logical fallacies: Formal and
Informal.
In informal, the issue goes with not your ‘case’ that might
be true but the way you structure your argument and how you are making your
points.
In formal, the issue goes with what you are saying and the
information itself can be wrong and misleading.[2]
One must keep in mind that; logical fallacies isn’t about
effectiveness and persuasiveness of our argument since a flawed argument can
also appear very persuasive. It is all about facilitating with necessary tools
to detect red lights in arguments so that one can avoid those mistakes in
reasonings.[3]
The logical fallacies create unpleasing impression. It is
barrier against a proper flow in favour of a case. Hence, we need to learn
certain fallacies so that we might not commit any error. Let us go through
certain logical fallacies with easy and important examples.
Ad hominem: It means ‘against a person’ in Latin.
This is actually attacking a person’s character, personality or irrelevant
aspects rather than their argument. Most of the times, this is fallacious
argument but in exceptional and rare cases, this can be a Hobson’s choice if
the opposition resists from every sort of stronger arguments or their character
is relevant to your point.[4] We may find these cases in
our Nepali idioms/ उखान such
as ‘भालुलाई पुराण सुनाउनु’, ‘सर्पलाई दूध पिलाए पनि विष निकाल्छ’, ‘कालो कागलाई धोएर सेतो हुँदैन’, ‘कालो गोरुलाई औशीं न पुर्णे’ and so on.
Example: “These Christians are plot of foreign invasion
and threat to our nationalism.” This is a common criticism we often face
and it attacks our character as if we have been against our own nation.
Straw Man: The straw figure isn’t an actual object but
a weaker representation. You can blow it or knock off the figure. This is the
same concept of Straw Man fallacy. In this flawed argument, the attack is made
on the position that is indeed never supported by the opposition. Either the
position of opponent is oversimplified or distracted from the main streamline. The
nearest contextual idioms might be these ‘१२ वर्ष रामायण पढायो, सिता कसकी जोई’, ‘नाङ्लो ठट्याएर
हात्ती तर्संदैन’and so on.
Example: “We (Christians) don’t believe in evolution.
We aren’t like you guys (Evolutionists) who believe humans came from monkeys.”
Meanwhile, the theory of evolution doesn’t teach this idea.
False Dilemma: Despite knowing there are many
options, but the opposition side only gives choices to choose between just two,
that’s false dilemma. This fallacy tries to make the exclusive argument against
the presence of many valid positions. This strategy attempts to hide important
facts and considerations and try to trick the opponent in thinking the argument
is more plausible than it really is![5] ‘मेरा गोरुको बाह्रै टक्का’ might be somehow
contextual Nepali idiom.
Example: “There are only two theories in Genesis 1.
Either Fiat creationism or Progressive creationism.” By the way, both of these
in modern time are concordist interpretation of Genesis 1. There are several
valid non-concordist lens of understanding Genesis 1 such as Framework,
Analogical view, Cosmic temple, Revelatory days, ANE Polemic, etc. which should
never be neglected.[6]
Slippery Slope: This argument is usually addressed to
present how dramatically bad an outcome would be. This can also be said ‘Domino
effect’[7] as the one consequence can
happen due to prior parameter i.e. one might lead to other. The weakness of
this argument is that it makes a wrong assumption of causation and effect of
entirely different premises and unrelated to each other in light of the
paradigm/prerequisites/parameter of opposition.
Example: “How can we believe rest of the Bible as literal
if early Genesis chapters were not to be taken literal?” Meanwhile,
many reputed church fathers interpreted Genesis in many non-literal ways yet
holding to fundamental Christian beliefs. Jesus’ parables were fictional in
event while the theological message was firm and true. Just because Genesis 1
is explained metaphorically doesn’t necessarily imply Adam and Eve were
fictional figures.[8]
Circular Reasoning: This might just appear to be an
argument but it is indeed moving around a circle. The conclusion is used to
justify the argument and the argument to justify their conclusion.[9] There is no explanation
offered in this argument.
Example: “The Bible is inspired, inerrant and truly the
word of God because the Bible itself claims so!” What if a
Hindu or a Muslim says the same for their Holy Scriptures like the Vedas, the
Gita or the Qur’an? Would you just dismiss them? Seriously?
Equivocation: It is ‘Equal voice’ in Latin. A word is
taken and its meaning is slightly changed so that it can mean something else.
It is using a word instead of another to hide the true meaning of what one is
saying. This is becoming dishonest and vague with the language so that its
meaning and usage can easily be twisted according to situation to keep oneself
in safe side.
Example: “The Bible is inspired scripture and should
be our final authority in whatever it speaks”. The question is, what
does ‘inspired’ and ‘final authority in whatever it speaks’ really mean? Does
it mean the Bible should be the basis for all academic fields? Does it mean
that the Bible is inspired in its theological concern about God’s relationship
with man and salvation? Hence, the statement is too much vague and anyone can
conclude anything for their own cases!
Appeal to Authority: We all like to cite experts of
relevant fields of our concerned topic. It is about our trust on their study
and knowledge. However, if we assume the experts are always correct then we
commit this fallacy. It is easy to commit but difficult to point out. It can
either be using irrelevant authority or citing poor authority. It teaches us
not to be insane in trusting even the experts on every grounds. They may know
about one thing but not everything.[10]
Example: “Even William Craig has said the Day-Age
interpretation can be a bad interpretation of Genesis 1”[11] Meanwhile, Craig isn’t
even a concerned giant for the topic of Genesis except for his general
transitional assessment as commentator on various views of Genesis 1. We can
just take guideline from him and explore in our further study.
Appeal to Ignorance: We are limited in knowledge no
matter how much we have studied. None of us knows about everything. It is an
assertion made based on something no one knows. It is just like giving six
blind people an easy task to explain elephant by touching it. Some might say
elephant is like snake by touching its tail, other might say it is like hard
wall by touching its body and so on. Sorry for this example, but it is not an
offense to physically challenged people.
Example: “Christianity is a foreign invasion.” This
has been traditionally popularized argument for centuries and millennia. It is
based on British dictators and doesn’t have any single drop of true reality
behind the curtain about Christians’ missionary works. Hence, it is a matter of
ignorance.
Appeal to Popular Opinion: It is using any point,
just because it has been popularized. No matter, how much evidence it holds or
not, people grab it being based on its wide circulation. Just because many
people believe it, that is not necessarily true. People aren’t always rational
and critical thinkers. Often time they tend to follow the trending environment.
In Nepali, this might sound similar: ‘कागले कान लग्यो भन्दैमा आफ्नो कान छाम्ने कि कागको पछि भाग्ने ?’ or ‘एक कान, दुई कान र मैदान’
Example: “Christians are beef-eaters because Christianity
is a beef-eating religion.” My question is, aren’t there veg Christians? I
am also a veg Christian! What’s so special correlation between beef and
Christianity? Maybe the hatred emerges just because cow is our National animal?
This argument doesn’t even touch boundary of Christianity.
Hasty Generalization: It is a natural habit of people
to make generalization. Sometimes, generalization without honest and sincere
exploration makes it fallacious. They don’t take the whole premise in
consideration. To avoid this, one can use words like ‘often’, ‘sometimes’, ‘it
seems as if…’, ‘It may be the case that…’ and so on. This makes our audience
feel that we aren’t arguing that the thing is true for everyone.[12]
Example: “There are many false prophets in Charismatic
field who deceives people with their signs and wonders. Hence, modern
Pentecostal denominations are also false.” Just because there are false
prophets and extremism in Charismatic circle doesn’t necessarily conclude every
Pentecostal denomination should be screwed. There are healthy denominations who
practice Charismatic experience correlating with the scripture. Regarding
theological errors, this is case with every denomination and not just
Pentecostals.
Poisoning the well: It is to present a negative
information about a person before he/she speaks so as to discredit the person’s
argument.[13]
Example: “Late Ravi Zacharias turned out to be a great
rapist and mischievous moral monster. Why should we recommend his book
‘Jesus talks with Krishna’?” It is not wise to discredit his works on
religious subject just because of his dark life (Yes, the victims of course
need justice and he will be judged by Lord himself for his terrific double life
and deeds). What if you or me fall away in future? What if reputed preachers,
teachers, pastors, etc. fall away in future? If our trust is on person, our
trust was never in Christ![14]
Red Herring: This is very popular in daily arguments
where people try to deviate main stream discussion and introduce irrelevant
topics to the subject at hand.
Example: “The book Job 40 and 41 really gave me a great
theological message about God’s sovereignty over his creation. But I wonder
if Behemoth and Leviathan were really dinosaurs?” Now, the point here is
something unusual that people begin their discussion and debates on
identification of these two animals. The concern shifts from theologically
beautiful message to disputable identification of these two terrifying beasts!
The outcome is debate! Were they dinosaurs like Brachiosaurus or just
Hippopotamus?
Special Pleading: Applying a standard to another that
is different from a standard applied to oneself.
Example: ‘विज्ञानको नजरमा
वेद र बाइबल पुस्तक’[15] Please, visit the blog
mentioned in the end note references.
Genetic Fallacy: Dismissing the case based on
irrelevant history and origin.
Example: “Pentecostalism only emerged after 19’s.
Hence, it is unbiblical, false and demonic movement.” Just because
Pentecostal revival was recent event, doesn’t make it false and unbiblical. The
Charismatic revival was often observed several times throughout Church history.[16] The event wasn’t focus
but its fruits and outcome. If origin is of issue, Protestantism itself came
later, isn’t it? But if the concern is about their activities, revise the point
of Hasty Generalization again. Furthermore, there are terrorism from
intellectual side as well.
Appeal to Force: Telling the audience that something
bad will happen if he/she didn’t accept the argument.
Example: “If you don’t even believe the literal plain
text understanding of Genesis 1, you are ultimately rejecting the Gospel!”
Read Dan Kimball’s book ‘How (Not) to Read the Bible’ for a miserable story of
a Microbiology Major student.[17] Do we really reject the Gospel
just because we don’t hold to literal reading of Genesis? No mere Christians
even read everything in the Bible literally![18]
Category Mistake: Attributing a property to something
that could not possibly have that property. Attributing facts of one kind are
attributed to another kind. Attributing
to one category that can only be properly attributed to another.[19]
Example: “How can God be One and yet three Gods?
That’s plain contradiction!” It is contradiction unless we appropriately
understand difference between ‘Being’ and ‘Person’. They are of different
categories! Hence, we just believe in One God and never Three!
Cause and Effect: It is assuming that the effect is
related to a cause because the events occur together.
Example: “Christianity corrupted our culture and
traditions. Hence, it is a destructive religion.” Just because
cultures got corrupted due to advent of Christianity doesn’t necessarily mean
it is a destroyer. We still greet people, dress with modesty, respect our
languages and cultural dresses, respect our identification as Nepali and our
National Flag. The issue here is probably about putting Tika and eating
Prasada. Please search these articles in this blog on why we don’t follow them.
Fallacy of Composition: Assuming that what is true
for a particular part is true for the whole.
Example: “Hindus in Nepal have never had a concept
of ‘Messiah’. Why should they then accept Jesus?” Just because Jews
were awaiting Messiah and Hindus aren’t doesn’t mean Hindus has nothing to do
with Jesus. Jesus is indeed the true necessity in our Eastern context where
people are striving for moksha, their identity, the struggle of life, the
meaning of life, the purpose of life, seeking divine characteristic and so on.
Its sad that we have failed to preach like many Indian great missionaries did
in our context.
Fallacy of Division: Assuming what is true for the
whole is true for the parts. Just because a car is red doesn’t mean its engine
has to be red.
Example: “God in O.T. clearly warned against worshipping
other gods. How then Christians are claiming Jesus is God?” Just
because God in O.T. severely warned against worshipping any other gods, it is
misleading to think we must not worship Jesus in N.T. God’s concern with
idolatry as a wider context isn’t the same case with His own incarnation in
N.T.
Appeal to Pity: Urging the hearer to accept the
argument based upon an appeal to emotions, sympathy, etc.[20]
Example: “Christians have destroyed our glorious religion
for sake of money!” We are often pinched with these emotional statements
in social medias. This is purely emotional aspect rather than critical analysis
and observation.
These are only few examples of logical fallacies. They can
give you enough headache and sweat at first level but never to worry. We need
to learn them more and practice using them more in apologetic conversation.
This helps us to be wise thinker, sincere analyzer and conscious in our
research and reasoning.
[Note: The readers can suggest the most closest or relevant Nepali idioms for these fallacies in the comment section so that general believers can also understand them easily.]
Bibliography:
C.S. Lewis Institute. John
Lennox How Does the Biblical Story of Creation and Science Fit Together?,
2019. Accessed July 5, 2022. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oC5gEJ2l34Y.
InspiringPhilosophy.
The Lesson of Samson, 2022. Accessed July 5, 2022.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4HXzG8wig7s.
Kimball,
Dan, and Sean McDowell. How (Not) to Read the Bible: Making Sense of the
Anti-Women, Anti-Science, pro-Violence, pro-Slavery, and Other Crazy-Sounding
Parts of Scripture, 2020. Accessed May 31, 2022.
https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&scope=site&db=nlebk&db=nlabk&AN=2980238.
Slick,
Matt. “Logical Fallacies or Fallacies in Argumentation.” Christian
Apologetics & Research Ministry, May 18, 2008. Accessed July 4, 2022.
https://carm.org/defending-the-faith/logical-fallacies-or-fallacies-in-argumentation/.
“An
Analytical Insight on विज्ञानको नजरमा वेद र बाइबल,” n.d. Accessed July 4, 2022.
https://apologeticsimpact.blogspot.com/2022/06/an-analytical-insight-on.html.
“Concordism
| Reasonable Faith.” Accessed June 8, 2022.
https://www.reasonablefaith.org/writings/question-answer/concordism.
“Genesis
1 in Its Ancient Context @Lucas Miles #evolution78 #christiantiktok
#ancientcosmology.” Accessed July 5, 2022.
https://www.tiktok.com/@inspiringphilosophy/video/7084264363451927854?_t=8Titexwq9uj&_r=1.
“Get
the Definition of Logical Fallacy With Examples of the Term.” ThoughtCo.
Accessed July 4, 2022.
https://www.thoughtco.com/what-is-logical-fallacy-1691259.
“How
Long Are the Days of Genesis 1? - Common-Questions.” BioLogos. Accessed
July 5, 2022.
https://biologos.org/common-questions/how-long-are-the-days-of-genesis-1/.
“Logical
Fallacies – Definition and Fallacy Examples.” FreeCodeCamp.Org. Last
modified June 23, 2021. Accessed July 4, 2022.
https://www.freecodecamp.org/news/logical-fallacies-definition-fallacy-examples/.
“The
Ten Greatest Revivals Ever: From Pentecost to the Present | Elmer L. Towns
& Douglas Porter & Elmer Towns [Towns, Elmer L. & Porter, Douglas
& Towns, Elmer] | Download.” Accessed July 5, 2022.
https://asia1lib.vip/book/16771989/1238a2.
[1] “Get
the Definition of Logical Fallacy With Examples of the Term,” ThoughtCo,
accessed July 4, 2022,
https://www.thoughtco.com/what-is-logical-fallacy-1691259.
[2] “Logical
Fallacies – Definition and Fallacy Examples,” FreeCodeCamp.Org, last
modified June 23, 2021, accessed July 4, 2022,
https://www.freecodecamp.org/news/logical-fallacies-definition-fallacy-examples/.
[3] Ibid.
[4] Ibid.
[5] Ibid.
[6] “How
Long Are the Days of Genesis 1? - Common-Questions,” BioLogos, accessed
July 5, 2022,
https://biologos.org/common-questions/how-long-are-the-days-of-genesis-1/.
[7] “Logical
Fallacies – Definition and Fallacy Examples.”
[8] “Genesis
1 in Its Ancient Context @Lucas Miles #evolution78 #christiantiktok
#ancientcosmology,” 1, accessed July 5, 2022,
https://www.tiktok.com/@inspiringphilosophy/video/7084264363451927854?_t=8Titexwq9uj&_r=1.
[9] “Logical
Fallacies – Definition and Fallacy Examples.”
[10] Ibid.
[11] “Concordism
| Reasonable Faith,” accessed June 8, 2022,
https://www.reasonablefaith.org/writings/question-answer/concordism.
[12] “Logical
Fallacies – Definition and Fallacy Examples.”
[13] Matt
Slick, “Logical Fallacies or Fallacies in Argumentation,” Christian
Apologetics & Research Ministry, May 18, 2008, accessed July 4, 2022,
https://carm.org/defending-the-faith/logical-fallacies-or-fallacies-in-argumentation/.
[14] InspiringPhilosophy,
The Lesson of Samson, 2022, accessed July 5, 2022,
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4HXzG8wig7s.
[15] “An
Analytical Insight on विज्ञानको
नजरमा वेद र बाइबल,” n.d., accessed July 4, 2022,
https://apologeticsimpact.blogspot.com/2022/06/an-analytical-insight-on.html.
[16] “The
Ten Greatest Revivals Ever: From Pentecost to the Present | Elmer L. Towns
& Douglas Porter & Elmer Towns [Towns, Elmer L. & Porter, Douglas
& Towns, Elmer] | Download,” accessed July 5, 2022,
https://asia1lib.vip/book/16771989/1238a2.
[17] Dan
Kimball and Sean McDowell, How (Not) to Read the Bible: Making Sense of the
Anti-Women, Anti-Science, pro-Violence, pro-Slavery, and Other Crazy-Sounding
Parts of Scripture, 2020, 258, accessed May 31, 2022,
https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&scope=site&db=nlebk&db=nlabk&AN=2980238.
[18] C.S.
Lewis Institute, John Lennox How Does the Biblical Story of Creation and
Science Fit Together?, 2019, accessed July 5, 2022,
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oC5gEJ2l34Y.
[19] Matt
Slick, “Logical Fallacies or Fallacies in Argumentation,” Christian
Apologetics & Research Ministry, May 18, 2008, accessed July 4, 2022,
https://carm.org/defending-the-faith/logical-fallacies-or-fallacies-in-argumentation/.
[20] Ibid.
.png)
.png)
.png)
.png)
0 Comments