Site MapHelpFeedbackChapter Objectives
Chapter Objectives
(See related pages)

The following are the main learning objectives from this chapter. To help you coordinate your studies, these objectives are organized into sub-sections (7-1, 7-2, etc.).



Objective 7-1
Recognize that a fallacy that does not rest on an illegitimate appeal to emotion often works by garbling the structure of a good argument.

Objective 7-2
Understand the basic concept entailed in every variety of ad hominem fallacy and why it makes for a bad argument.

  • Understand that good reasoning depends on a clear and steadily maintained distinction between the person making a claim and the claim itself.
  • Differentiate among the most common breeds of ad hominem fallacies: the personal attack, the inconsistency ad hominem, the circumstantial ad hominem, poisoning the well, the genetic fallacy, and also certain positive ad hominem fallacies.

Objective 7-3
Understand how certain fallacies begin with sound principles of logic or argumentation and only distort or misapply them.

  • Recognize the fallacy known as the straw man and understand the difference between it and the legitimate refutation of a contrary position.
  • Identify varieties of the false dilemma, which begins with a rational principle about alternatives.
  • See the difference between a false dilemma and its logical (non-fallacious) counterpart.
  • Differentiate among the false dilemma itself and the related perfectionist fallacy and the line-drawing fallacy.

Objective 7-4
Understand the type of fallacy commonly called "slippery slope" and how to identify examples of it.

  • Realize that a reliance on unfounded claims (about what leads to what else) is the telling mark that makes an argument a case of the slippery slope.

Objective 7-5
Understand the kinds of fallacies that have to do with illogical refusals to give arguments in exactly those situations that call for arguments.

  • Understand the fallacy of misplacing the burden of proof, and be able to identify it.
  • Learn the rules that help to specify which side of a given issue actually has the burden of proof.
  • Understand the role of initial plausibility in determining the burden of proof.
  • Understand the very special case of illogicality known as begging the question, and how to spot instances of begged questions.







Critical ThinkingOnline Learning Center

Home > Chapter 7 > Chapter Objectives