Fallacies of Defective Induction

These are arguments whose premise seems to provide ground for the conclusion but proven to be insufficient upon analysis.

1.       Ad Ignorantiam or Appeal to Ignorance

2.       Ad Verecundiam or Appeal to Inappropriate Authority

3.       False Cause

4.       Converse Accident or Hasty Generalization

5.       Anecdotal Evidence

6.       Faulty Comparison

7.       Far-fetched Hypothesis

8.       Confusing an explanation with an excuse

9.       Guilt by Association

1.       Argumentum ad Ignorantiam or Appeal to Ignorance

It is arguing that a belief is false because it is not proven to be true, or true because it is not proven to be false.

Examples:

                                                “Nobody has ever proved to me that there is God. So God does not exist.”

                                                “The suspect is guilty because there is no proof that he is not guilty.”

2.       Argumentum ad Verecundiam or Appeal to Inappropriate Authority

This fallacy comes when one argues for a claim on the basis of someone who has no knowledge about the matter at issue.

Examples:

“John Lloyd, a notable actor, said the Biogesic is safe and effective. So, Biogesic is indeed safe and effective.”

“My genius professor in Math said that Alexander the Great was gay. No wonder why most historians do not include this fact in their books.”

3.       False Cause

This is an error when one attributes a false cause to a phenomenon.

Examples:

                                                “I passed the interview because I wore a red t-shirt.”

“The Philippines has a rapid increase in GDP because many buildings are being erected.”

4.       Converse Accident or Hasty Generalization

This fallacy consists in making a generalization on basis of few instances of a case in question. Stereotyping is also a form of hasty generalization.

Examples:

“We have passed through two villages already, and people there were not nice. Therefore, all people in the villages of this province are not nice to strangers.”

“Indigenous people from hill top tribes are illiterate. There were indigenous people studying here and I had to send them back to grade school because they do not know how to read and right.”

5.       Anecdotal Evidence

This is a fallacious generalizing on the basis of some story that provides an inadequate sample. If you discount evidence arrived at by systematic search or by testing in favor of a few firsthand stories, then your reasoning contains the fallacy of overemphasizing anecdotal evidence.

Examples:

“They say smoking is dangerous to our health. My father is a chain smoker and he has never been sick in all his life. So, I don’t believe that smoking is dangerous to our health.”

“I don’t think education can bring us success. There are billionaires who are not even college graduates like Bill Gates and Henry Sy.”

6.       Faulty Comparison

Occurs when you try to make a point about something by comparison, and you do so by comparing it with the wrong thing.

Examples:

“We gave half of the patients pain reliever and paracetamol to the other half. After one hour we observed that those whom we have given pain reliever are more energized than anyone else. Hence, we concluded that pain reliever is more effective than paracetamol.”

Wearing Addidas shoes is more comfortable than wearing Levi’s jeans.

7.       Far-fetched Hypothesis

This is the fallacy of offering a bizarre (far-fetched) hypothesis as the correct explanation without first ruling out more mundane explanations.

Example:

“Look at that mutilated cow in the field, and see that flattened grass. Aliens must have landed in a flying saucer and savaged the cow to learn more about the beings on our planet.”

8.       Confusing an explanation with an excuse

It is treating someone’s explanation of a fact as if it were a justification of the fact. Explaining a crime should not be confused with excusing the crime, but it too often is.

Examples:

“She happened to kill her husband out of her hatred of him. She has been a battered wife for almost ten years. So, she is not guilty.”

“I cheated in the exam because I had no other choice. I was sick the night before the exam so I could not study, and I realized that if I would not pass, then my scholarship could be withdrawn.” [Explains a student who was caught cheating]

9.        Guilt by Association

Guilt by association is a version of the ad hominem fallacy in which a person is said to be guilty of error because of the group he or she associates with. The fallacy occurs when we unfairly try to change the issue to be about the speaker’s circumstances rather than about the speaker’s actual argument.

Examples:

“Senator Cruz is pro-RH Law because he is a friend of those senators who authored the RH Law.”

“He is a thief because he comes from the family of thieves.”