Fallacies of Argument Chapter 17

Chapter 17 was basically about fallacies in arguments.  The chapter defines fallacies as arguments that are flawed by their “very nature or structure.” Fallacies are interesting because they raise questions of the ethics of the argument.  The book gives an example of the fallacy ad hominem argument.  The ad hominem is a type of strategy of criticizing a person or character that one is unfavorable of.  This fallacy involves just insulting a person.  The book divides the types of fallacies into three categories.  They are emotional, ethical, and logical.  Fallacies that arise in emotional argument are flawed pieces of argument based on emotion.  Examples of this type include scare tactics and “Either-Or Choices.”  These tactics can mislead the audience into being afraid of something not needed to be afraid of or tricking the audience into only having two choices.  Fallacies of ethic arguments include dogmatism.  Dogmatism is when the writer assumes a particular position or belief is the only one acceptable in a community.  Fallacies of logical argument are flawed arguments based on logic.  Some examples of these are hasty generalizations and faulty casualty.  A hasty generalization is defined as an inference drawn from insufficient evidence.  An example included in the chapter is the assumption that all Honda brand cars junk based off one of their model car that breaks down.  A faulty causality is a fallacious assumption that because one event preceded another, it is the cause of the after event. 

                One particular part of interest in the text was the section on Hasty Generalizations.  I found this part sort of funny because it the example given in the book seemed like racism in car brands.  The example states “Because my Honda broke down, then all Hondas must be junk.”  This is just like stereotyping  because it’s like saying if you meet one particular person of a certain brand that you do not like then you assume all people of that brand are the same and you do not like. 

                An example of Hasty generalization I found in my own life are in video games.  For instance, in League of Legends, many people do play a certain character based on first impressions of it.  If they play the character and do horribly in the game with it, then they never play that character again and say it is “up” or underpowered.  On the other hand, they might do the opposite.

Chapter 13

Chapter 13 was about style in arguments.  Arguments can come in many styles and the type of vocabulary one uses can help define its style.  For instance, the book gives an example of a CEO who must defines his argument by using a serious formal tone of voice and compares this argument and style to a student’s memorable language argument used to depict a stereotype.  These examples show how a different style or vocabulary is needed for different types of argument.  Other factors also play in defining an argument such as punctuation, figurative language, and tropes.  The book uses Clint Eastwood as a source of credibility that punctuation is key in argument by quoting, “You can show a lot with a look… It’s punctuation.”  It uses the semicolon as an example of how arguments can be read.  The semicolon is a strong “pause” than the comma but is a weaker pause than the period.  Figurative language can help define an argument by “drawing parallels between an unknown and a known.” (p. 426) Examples given are Microsoft word processing system made understandable by comparing it to an office and DNA being compared to a helix or zipper.  Tropes such as metaphors and similes can also aid an argument by comparing two things and clarifying arguments.

            A particular section that was interesting in the chapter was sentence structure.  I found this part interesting because sentence structure is probably the hardest to “accomplish” in aiding one’s use in developing a strong argument.  I also feel it is the strongest in ways to develop an argument.  Though reason is needed to back up an argument, sentence structure can make certain parts of your argument stand out or hide certain parts within it.  For instance, in many speeches, sentence structure is used make particular phrases stand out and be memorable in developing an argument such as one of John F. Kennedy’s speech, “Ask not what your country can do for you—ask what you can do for your country.”  The writing device he uses here is known as antimetabole.  This is sort of sentence structure.  It is the repetition of words in successive clauses but in transposed grammatical order.  This style of sentence structure greatly helped his the argument and inspired patriotism.  I feel sentence structure is one of the device to truly master in an argument.  I know I am horrible at sentence structure and argument.  Though I may try to make parts of my argument stand out, I mainly just write simple sentences or awkward confusing sentences to portray my thoughts.