5. Identifying False Arguments.

5. Identifying False Arguments. False arguments twist or ignore logic. If you can

identify false or weak reasoning, you will effectively defend your argument and
influence (persuade) your receivers. Common diversionary tactics include:
 The personal argument
 The emotive argument
 The illogical argument
 The dishonest argument.
Personal arguments aim to persuade the audience of the validity of an idea or attitude by
discrediting or attacking the source of an opposing idea or attitude. A case may be
undermined by the claim that the person putting it forward is:
 „guilty of that very thing‟. This introduces a totally irrelevant subject
(the personal record of the source) and ignores the contention at hand,
be it true or false: “Why should we listen to his proposal for flexi-time,
when we all know he doesn‟t come in until eleven anyway?”
 an unreliable source of information on the matter: “Well, he would
say that, wouldn‟t he, being a foreigner.” (This has nothing to do with
the truth or falsehood of what has been said.)
 otherwise discreditable. Many debaters resort to attacking the
opponent, if they cannot refute his argument on its own demerits:
“You want to implement a 5 year plan? You can‟t even stay married to
the same person for a year at a time!”
 bound to be discreditable for holding that very view. It is possible to
attack an opponent before anything has been uttered: “Only a complete
idiot would suggest that we change the present system.” [any takers?]