The following is an archived copy of a message sent to a Discussion List run by the Campaign Against Sanctions on Iraq.

Views expressed in this archived message are those of the author, not of the Campaign Against Sanctions on Iraq.

[Main archive index/search] [List information] [Campaign Against Sanctions on Iraq Homepage]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[casi] American Iraq dossier

[ Presenting plain-text part of multi-format email ]

Just released!  USA's entire basis for war against Iraq.  Colin Powell was right, you'd better hold 
on to your hats!!!!!....

See where any of his arguments fit below.  From "you are with us or you are with the terrorists" 
(false dilemna) to "absence of proof is proof" (from ignorance)...


Fallacies of Distraction
   False Dilemma: two choices are given when in fact there are three options
   From Ignorance: because something is not known to be true, it is assumed to be false
   Slippery Slope: a series of increasingly unacceptable consequences is drawn
   Complex Question: two unrelated points are conjoined as a single proposition

Appeals to Motives in Place of Support

   Appeal to Force: the reader is persuaded to agree by force
   Appeal to Pity: the reader is persuaded to agree by sympathy
   Consequences: the reader is warned of unacceptable consequences
   Prejudicial Language: value or moral goodness is attached to believing the author
   Popularity: a proposition is argued to be true because it is widely held to be true

Changing the Subject

   Attacking the Person:
      (1) the person's character is attacked
      (2) the person's circumstances are noted
      (3) the person does not practise what is preached

   Appeal to Authority:
      (1) the authority is not an expert in the field
      (2) experts in the field disagree
      (3) the authority was joking, drunk, or in some other way not being serious

   Anonymous Authority: the authority in question is not named
   Style Over Substance: the manner in which an argument (or arguer) is presented is felt to affect 
the truth of the conclusion

Inductive Fallacies

   Hasty Generalization: the sample is too small to support an inductive generalization about a 
   Unrepresentative Sample: the sample is unrepresentative of the sample as a whole
   False Analogy: the two objects or events being compared are relevantly dissimilar
   Slothful Induction: the conclusion of a strong inductive argument is denied despite the evidence 
to the contrary
   Fallacy of Exclusion: evidence which would change the outcome of an inductive argument is 
excluded from consideration

Fallacies Involving Statistical Syllogisms

   Accident: a generalization is applied when circumstances suggest that there should be an 
   Converse Accident : an exception is applied in circumstances where a generalization should apply

Causal Fallacies

   Post Hoc: because one thing follows another, it is held to cause the other
   Joint effect: one thing is held to cause another when in fact they are both the joint effects of 
an underlying cause
   Insignificant: one thing is held to cause another, and it does, but it is insignificant compared 
to other causes of the effect
   Wrong Direction: the direction between cause and effect is reversed
   Complex Cause: the cause identified is only a part of the entire cause of the effect

Missing the Point

   Begging the Question: the truth of the conclusion is assumed by the premises
   Irrelevant Conclusion: an argument in defense of one conclusion instead proves a different 
   Straw Man: the author attacks an argument different from (and weaker than) the opposition's best 

Fallacies of Ambiguity

   Equivocation: the same term is used with two different meanings
   Amphiboly: the structure of a sentence allows two different interpretations
   Accent: the emphasis on a word or phrase suggests a meaning contrary to what the sentence 
actually says

Category Errors

   Composition: because the attributes of the parts of a whole have a certain property, it is 
argued that the whole has that property
   Division: because the whole has a certain property, it is argued that the parts have that 

Non Sequitur

   Affirming the Consequent: any argument of the form: If A then B, B, therefore A
   Denying the Antecedent: any argument of the form: If A then B, Not A, thus Not B
   Inconsistency: asserting that contrary or contradictory statements are both true

Syllogistic Errors

   Fallacy of Four Terms: a syllogism has four terms
   Undistributed Middle: two separate categories are said to be connected because they share a 
common property
   Illicit Major: the predicate of the conclusion talks about all of something, but the premises 
only mention some cases of the term in the predicate
   Illicit Minor: the subject of the conclusion talks about all of something, but the premises only 
mention some cases of the term in the subject
   Fallacy of Exclusive Premises: a syllogism has two negative premises
   Fallacy of Drawing an Affirmative Conclusion From a Negative Premise: as the name implies
   Existential Fallacy: a particular conclusion is drawn from universal premises

Fallacies of Explanation

   Subverted Support (The phenomenon being explained doesn't exist)
   Non-support (Evidence for the phenomenon being explained is biased)
   Untestability (The theory which explains cannot be tested)
   Limited Scope (The theory which explains can only explain one thing)
   Limited Depth (The theory which explains does not appeal to underlying causes)

Fallacies of Definition

   Too Broad (The definition includes items which should not be included)
   Too Narrow (The definition does not include all the items which shouls be included)
   Failure to Elucidate (The definition is more difficult to understand than the word or concept 
being defined)
   Circular Definition (The definition includes the term being defined as a part of the definition)
   Conflicting Conditions (The definition is self-contradictory)



For Educators... Please feel free to download the entire text (50 K) in plain-brown wrapper HTML 
(does not contain the last three sections - sorry). Permission is granted to use, abuse and 
reproduce this document in any way you wish provided (a) you don't claim copyright over it, (b) you 
don't charge anyone for using it, and (c) you indicate its original authorship. Read more on my 
views about copyright if you're curious.

Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now

Sent via the discussion list of the Campaign Against Sanctions on Iraq.
To unsubscribe, visit
To contact the list manager, email
All postings are archived on CASI's website:

[Campaign Against Sanctions on Iraq Homepage]