Hey, Allie Rubber here. This month, I'm bringing you an encore edition of Wiser World. And this episode is a hidden treasure that aired about a year ago. It's short, it's to the point, but it's just really good stuff if you want to be a better critical thinker.
high school, my English teacher taught us all about logical fallacies. She tested us extensively on them, which I found very annoying at the time. But the older I get, oh, the more grateful I am that she did because the internet, media, social media. advertisements full they're full of logical fallacies and i'm just really grateful that she laid that groundwork i think we all could use a reminder of how to think more logically more clearly myself included this is an episode i need to listen
to probably annually or biannually. So anyway. I'm encoring it today. I hope you enjoy it, and I'll be back with a brand new 101 series in January. Until then, take care, be safe, stay curious, and thanks for being interested in my podcast and listening to it. appreciate it. What is a logical fallacy?
how can we be better at spotting them how does knowing and understanding logical fallacies increase our ability to think more critically We'll answer these questions and many, many more in today's episode on recognizing logical fallacies for better critical thinking. Welcome to Wiser World, a podcast for busy people who need a refresher on all things world. Here we explore different regions of the globe, giving you the facts and context you need to think historically about current events.
I truly believe that the more we learn about the world, the more we embrace our shared humanity. I'm your host, Ali Roper. Thanks for being here. Adobe Express is the quick and easy create-anything app. It's my go-to for making my business stand out. From videos and social posts to flyers and logos. Search for Adobe Express to find out more and use it for free.
I think it's safe to say that we've all had moments where someone makes a statement that seems great at first glance. We're convinced. Like, yeah, I totally agree. That's it. That's it. And then someone else comes in and asks a question or two and kind of picks at it for a minute and the whole argument falls apart. And then we kind of feel like idiots for believing that statement in the first place and going for it, right?
Those types of statements or arguments have a different name or a new name I'm going to introduce today, and that's called logical fallacies. These are deceptive or flawed arguments that appear to be strong. So they masquerade as strong statements. But once you know what to look for, you can dismantle them very easily. So again,
The word for these is logical fallacies. And I've given a lot of thought to what to cover in this final episode of 2023. And despite the fact that I have a massive list of things that I want to cover in this podcast and next year and the years after, the one idea... that kept coming back to me was that I needed to do a review of logical fallacies and critical thinking skills because
Noticing logical fallacies is a skill that all of us need, especially because right now things are so polarizing. And many of us are heading into election season in the countries we live in, and we just really need our wits about us. And I remember... high school, my English teacher spent some time on these, and hands down, they are the most impactful lessons I think I learned that year of high school. I think about logical fallacies often now.
And once you know them and you know what to look for, you will see them everywhere. I'm not going to go into every single logical fallacy out there and overburden you with a bunch of vocabulary because that's not what I want to do. But I have picked a few of... the most common ones that I see often and I'm going to explain them, give some examples, make them really approachable.
And then I want to talk about useful ways that we can apply what we're learning to just normal, everyday people life. So again, I'm going to give you examples of eight different types of logical fallacies, and then I'll tell you why they aren't logically sound.
just want to remind you that it really doesn't matter if you remember the name of the logical fallacy. You know, in high school, you're tested on knowing the name and that's nice, but I don't really think that's necessary. The point is that you can just catch the lack of logic before it dupes you.
or catch it after it dupes you. And when you can catch something that's illogical and you can see, oh, this is trying to get me to think a certain way, you could stop and evaluate and think for yourself. And that, I believe, is the root of critical thinking. being able to think for yourself. So let's get to it. Let's learn a little bit about logical fallacies. The first one has a fun name. It's ad hominem.
An ad hominem is Latin for aimed at the man or attack the man. So it starts with an A. You can think attack, right? Basically, this type of argument is a direct attack on... your opponent's character rather than the issue at hand or their position on that issue. So let me give you some examples. So here's one that I actually saw. I witnessed this. Someone said that. What's happening here?
is the person is getting you to look away from the issue at hand which is what abortion right to focus on the other person their opponent, and something about them. So in this case, the issue is abortion, and they're pointing away by attacking that person based on their choices of what they're choosing to put into their body. Like, wait, what? Right?
This is used all of the time in politics and in the comment sections under nearly every single YouTube video, a social media post known to man, right? There are plenty of politicians who love ad hominem. It's their number one way to throw off a debate. not have to talk about the issue at hand, just attack the other person's character or their body or their family or their looks or whatever, like anything. They'll do anything to avoid talking about the actual issue.
That just isn't logical. If we're arguing about a particular issue, sending an insult isn't going... to do anything. It's not going to solve the problem at all. It's the oldest debate trick in the book. And if you know that it's there and that it's being used, you won't be fooled. So whenever I see ad hominem used, I instantly think, okay.
this person has lost their cool, or they don't know what to say about the issue, and so they've resorted to personal insults. And for me, they lose respect in my book when they do that. Ad hominem, attack the man. So when you see people using ad hominem or you're tempted to use it, the key is to recognize it and then insist that we get back to the topic at hand, not the person making the argument.
That's number one. That's the first logical fallacy ad hominem. Let's move on to number two. This one's called... the red herring. You've probably heard of this one before. This is fun. So a red herring is when a person shifts the focus from the debate by introducing something completely irrelevant.
So it's like a distraction. They want to divert your attention so they'll bring up something else, anything else to avoid talking about the issue. Now, the term red herring is believed generally to have come from British fox hunting. where sometimes to make a hunt go longer, they would drag a dead red herring, which is a really strong smelling fish, and they drag it across the trail to confuse the dogs and make the hunt go longer. So a common red herring...
tactic is just changing the subject. Like in a debate when someone asks about the economy and the politician just masterfully tweaks it to start talking about pollution. Like they can find a way to talk about the thing that they want to talk about instead of the issue at hand.
It also can mean avoiding the question entirely. Like when you ask someone where they were last night and then they start telling you how hard they've been working lately. And they can just kind of like tweak it so they don't have to talk about the thing that they don't want to talk about.
Or like when you're arguing with your spouse and you say, you never do the dishes. And they respond back with, what about you? You never take out the trash. It's like, wait, that's a red herring. Right. We're talking about the dishes. And if they added in and you're a horrible, messy person.
then they've added ad hominem too, right? So hopefully you can see now how a red herring is that they haven't answered your question or talked about the issue at hand, but they've made you feel like they have because they're... often talking about something along similar lines. That's the trickiest part about red herring is recognizing like, wait, we've changed the subject or we've distracted me to something else, but it's so close to it that I'm just kind of going with it.
that's a red herring. It's a dead fish trying to throw you off the scent. So when you see a red herring being used, again, recognize it, point it out and say, No, that's not the topic that we're discussing. We are discussing this, right? And bring it back because it's very subtle. Sometimes people are very good at it and it can be very, very subtle. So that's Red Herring.
All right, next let's talk about the straw man. A straw man is where someone takes the issue at hand and instead of arguing about it at face value, They exaggerate or misrepresent the topic to make it easier to refute or attack it. Now, if you stop and think about this, a straw man or a scarecrow or whatever you want to call it, it's a lot easier to knock that down than an actual living.
person, a living man, right? So the idea is if you can exaggerate the topic, misrepresent it strongly enough, it just makes it a lot easier to knock it down. And this became very popular in the late 1800s in debates, and it continues until today. And I have seen this across the spectrum in politics. Everybody uses it. I'm going to give you two examples on both sides of the spectrum. The first is I recently saw someone...
talking about how they supported the idea of restricting the sale of assault weapons. And someone else responded, why do you want to take away everyone's guns? Okay. This is a straw man argument, right? That's not what the person said. The person said they wanted to restrict the sale of assault weapons. And the response was, why do you want to take away everyone's guns? That is an exaggeration or a misrepresentation of what the person was saying.
side, I saw another argument where someone was talking about how climate change policies were making it very difficult for businesses to make a profit. And someone said, why are you denying that climate change exists? Again, you can see how this is straw man, right? They've exaggerated the climate change thing, made it much bigger of an issue, and that's not really what they're talking about. They're talking about climate change policies and economics and business, right?
Another example could be if you believe in the color blue, then you must hate the color red. That's a very simple straw man, but it's just like, whoa, that's really a large exaggeration of the issue here. Now, when we see ourselves using straw men, it might be helpful to ask ourselves, okay, what nuance am I missing here?
Can two things be true at once? Can this issue be more complicated than I'm making it to be? How can I have more space for complexity? I will be honest, I find myself using stramen when I don't know enough about an issue. that I'm arguing against. I find myself making more wild claims about people when I really haven't gotten to know them as well or the issue as well.
And this play on extremes and this moving to hyperbole is not a great spot to get into. And unfortunately, our world is full of it today. I believe we can avoid straw men by being willing to tolerate and acknowledge complexity.
have hard conversations that take a little more time. And we could still stand up for what we believe in, but recognize we're not going to exaggerate here. We're going to talk about the issue at hand for a little bit longer than three seconds, right? All right, number four. This one is so good. This is the Slippery Slope.
I think this one's very easy to remember. In a slippery slope scenario, a person claims that there's a starting point and then there's going to be this series of events following and there's no real evidence that this series of events is going to happen. Here's one example I read online that made me laugh.
If we make an exception for that guy's service dog, then other people will want to bring their dogs and then everybody will bring their dog. And before you know it, our restaurant is going to be overrun with dogs and their slobber and their hair and all the noise they make and nobody will want to eat. here anymore and we'll have to close.
That was a slippery slope, right? You can see here how the person assumes that because one small thing has happened, it's going to lead to major and sometimes really ludicrous consequences. Now, if we pause here for a minute. This person might be right. Right. Like that legitimately could happen. All of those things are possible. And looking ahead and seeing the possibilities of the dominoes that could fall from one choice.
i believe that is very smart it is intelligent to think okay how could the decision that i'm making right now have a domino effect in the future Right. So not always is a slippery slope argument a fallacy. What makes it a fallacy is when someone claims that something will automatically lead to a series of other things happening and they don't make any room for other options as well. So in this example of the dogs, there are a lot more options available to that restaurant than just...
our business is going to close because we make this one exception, right? So acknowledging all of the different possibilities and options that they have would be a more logical approach. I have another example of a slippery slope fallacy that happened to me the other day.
In the past few months, and I'm recording this in December 2023, a lot more people have been listening to this podcast, which is exciting. And I'm really happy about that. But as a result, I have had to pay more money for my hosting platform because...
I don't know if you know this, but they charge you based on download numbers. So if your download numbers go up, it becomes more and more expensive to podcast. I did not know that when I started, but that's true. Also, email platforms and websites, you get the picture. It just all...
expands so while i'm very happy that more people are listening to the podcast and hope that continues it's also opened up more questions for me and i've been recently approached by some podcasting networks and they're encouraging me to do ads. And I initially started my Patreon with the hopes of avoiding ads, but it's really hard to run a large podcast without them. And so as I was deciding what to do, I told my husband,
If I join a network and I start growing my audience and I start doing ads on my show, then I might grow more than I want to grow. And then I could become famous. And I don't really want to become famous because I won't be approachable anymore. And then I'll become weird. And I just want to be a person who wants to go.
to the grocery store in their pajamas to get ice cream and I want to be recognized. And then I'm just going to become Taylor Swift. And my husband was like, Ali, it's a history podcast. Anyway, it was such a good slippery slope moment. You know, if you join a network and you're really choosy and deliberate about what types of ads you want to show, just like all other podcasts out there, you're probably going to be fine, right? I just needed a good dose.
of logic. I hope you get a laugh at that because I sure did. Very human over here. When we start going down slippery slopes and you start to see other people going down them, catch it. Run it through a more logical perspective. Make room for complexity, reality. There are probably more options out there than you're giving credit. All right, let's talk number five. This is the false dilemma. Sometimes it's known as a false dichotomy.
This is where someone claims that there are only two options in a given situation. Usually, these two options are extreme opposites of each other. So here's some examples. If you don't support my choice, then you are never really my friend anyway. There's more than two choices there. Or here's an easier one. If we don't order pizza, then we'll have to eat the week-old leftovers in the fridge.
Well, no, that's not true. If we don't order pizza, we could order takeout or we could eat something from the freezer or we could do any number of other things. But a false dilemma makes you feel like there's only two options. And this also can be... It's pretty glaring when you can recognize it, but people use it all the time and people fall for it. This is very black and white thinking.
Very often it's used in advertising, like a moving company will say, you know, do you want a seamless, easy move or do you want complete chaos? Okay, well, that's illogical. There are a lot of options of moves in the middle, but there's no acknowledgement of that at all. Now, sometimes there really is an actual dilemma between two opposing options, and you do have to choose.
That does happen. That is a legit dilemma. A false dilemma is when you've been given only two options and there really are more legitimate options. To solve this, we have to recognize and acknowledge aloud that other reasonable options exist. Recognize it, put a stop to it. Okay, we got other options. Do you find it hard to sleep at night?
then the Sleep Cove podcast can help you. Hi, I'm Christopher Fitton, the voice and clinical hypnotherapist behind Sleep Cove. Sleep Cove features sleep hypnosis, meditations and bedtime stories, all designed to help those of you who struggle at night to achieve a restful and peaceful night's sleep. Search for Sleep Cove on Apple Podcasts or Spotify. and see why sleep cave helps millions of people sleep deeply all night long.
All right, let's talk about number six. This is a hasty generalization. This is when someone makes a statement when they've only considered one or a few examples instead of using more extensive research to back up the claim. So there's a lot more information that they are not talking about. It's too hasty, it's too fast, and it's generalizing something without more data. I actually saw this recently done on social media about my podcast, and I thought this would be a really great example.
I saw someone say in a comment on someone else's post, Okay. First of all, I'm really glad that they listened to the podcast. I'm very happy about that. But that's not what I say in the podcast, right? So for starters, we can't... we can't make claims based off of just one podcast, right? We have to listen to more things. We have to do more research on our own. We need to have more.
information. Otherwise, it is too hasty and it is too generalized. Yes, I'm happy my podcast is helpful. I do research it heavily. I hope that it is very reliable. But I also hope that we continue to do more research beyond just this, right? Sure. British politics have affected many countries in the world. They admit that. They have caused some problems. But not every problem in the world is because of Great Britain. That's a very strong generalization.
Personally, I think that this is something to be very aware of in social media, to notice when you yourself do it. and when others do it to you or to others. Sometimes we generalize because we need to make sense of the world. And I think that there are times and places to generalize. But hasty generalizations don't acknowledge that there could be more...
complexity. They don't recognize that it hasn't been well-researched. And I think that we definitely need to be aware of that and stay away from that. Let's talk about number seven. The example I just gave also applies to number seven, which is called appeal to authority. What happens in this logical fallacy is when someone appeals to an authority figure's expertise, but kind of overstates or exaggerates that expertise a little bit more than necessary.
a person stating that this one podcast shared something that now is, you know, facts done. End of story. Well, first of all, I never said that in my podcast. But what's happened here is there's been an inflation of authority. There's been an exaggeration of authority. Another example of this could be, if you want to be healthy, you need to stop drinking coffee because I read it on this one fitness blog. Okay, now the fitness blog could be right. It totally could be right. It's not...
that it's not. It's that it's inflating the authority of that blog just a smidge, right? Let's think here. What other sources could we use to justify that claim? If we can find more sources... That's great. This one can be a little bit twisty at times for me because it requires some work, it requires some nuance, and it requires some discernment because we do want to appeal to authority.
In some situations and on some issues, there are such things as experts, and appealing to authority can be good and necessary. The problem is when the authority is exaggerated. How do we combat this? Well, we have to recognize that authority can be good. It is necessary in many, many cases, like a court of law, for starters. There are a lot of places where experts and authority really do matter.
However, what's important is to catch when the authority of that person is exaggerated or misconstrued. It's like, we're done. The conversation's over. If someone drops it like... I'm just going to pull rank here and say boom, boom, boom, and I have no room for any other person's opinion on this. We might be overstating authority, and we might need to dig a little bit more there.
Those are my thoughts on appeal to authority. All right, number eight. We're at the last one. This is called begging the question. This is a fallacy where an arguer says something that... begs a question. In other words, the person makes a claim that's based on an assumption that something's true, but they don't present any reason to believe it. So some examples.
Vintage furniture is better than new furniture because it's usually made of real wood. Okay, I would read that and be like, oh yeah, okay, cool. But if you stop and think, this statement assumes... that real wood is a better material for furniture. Is it? It begs the question, wait, what makes real wood better than other materials?
So you have to stop and be like, wait, what question comes up in my mind next, right? Another example is blueberries are good for you because they're filled with antioxidants. Okay, this might be true, but it begs the question, what's so beneficial about antioxidants? It assumes that antioxidants are good. for you and healthy for you. So you see in these examples that
These statements might actually be true. It's not that the statement is incorrect. It's that it isn't fully logical. We need something to be added to it to make it logical and valid, like the explanation to the question that it begs. Real wood might make for better furniture.
Antioxidants might legitimately be good for you, right? But we have to answer those questions. There has to be evidence of the claim. This one is also really tricky to spot and requires us to think more critically. We've got to think it through.
Okay, there are many, many more fallacies out there, but I do hope that this gives us a stronger foundation to begin thinking of them if we aren't already. So let me just review them really quick and then I'll end with a few thoughts of my own. So first is at home. homonym, this is attack the man, right? Attack the person instead of the issue. Red herring, that's a distraction, right? Throw you off the scent. Straw man, that's exaggerated claim to make it easier to knock it down.
Slippery slope. Claiming that a series of events will happen. It usually ends catastrophically without acknowledging that there could be other options. False dilemma. This is showing only two options when there are more. Hasty generalization. This is making a statement without doing more research. Appeal to authority. This is exaggerating someone's authority to make a claim and shut down the conversation.
And lastly, begging the question, making the claim that something is true based on an assumption that hasn't been shown evidence. Okay, so... If you want to look into more logical fallacies, there are so many out there, and they're highly Google-able. I think it's important to distinguish that some logical fallacies aren't necessarily untrue. I think it's really important we know that.
But what's the key is that they aren't persuasive arguments because they lack strong logic. I do not personally believe that everything in life has to be logical. And not everything has to be pushed through the lens of logic. However, when it comes to history, politics, social media...
creating opinions logic is a very helpful guide and people who have a strong foundation in logic tend to in my opinion be a little bit more wise they can take a step back ask some questions dig a little they aren't quick to make flash arguments judgments, not quick to generalize. They're just willing to stop and ask, okay, wait.
Do I believe this? Is this true? Is this good? Is this logical? And then usually these types of people can take feedback. They can poke at their own ideas. I love being with these kinds of people. and I really hope to be one of them. Now that you know these eight logical fallacies, I hope that you go on the hunt for them. You'll see them everywhere, and if you're anything like me, you'll probably get a real kick out of...
knowing them like, Oh, that's, Oh, that's a straw man. One, one way that understanding logical fallacies has helped me in my life is that when people use them against me, instead of it hurting my feelings, I really feel like, well, well, wait, that's just not logical. And I can kind of laugh it off and move on. I found them to be very empowering. So I hope that's the case for you as well.
If you learned anything in this podcast, please consider sharing it with a friend or a family member. And thank you so much for listening. You can always support the podcast through Patreon, which is where you can spend a little each month and get extra resources that go along with each episode. A big thank you.
you to all my Patreon subscribers. I'm super grateful. You can sign up at www.patreon.com slash Wiser World Podcast. Thank you so much for listening. And until next time, let's flex our critical thinking muscles. go make the world a little wiser.