Informal logic
Introduction
Informal logic refers to all those principles of logic and logical thinking that are outside the formal setting of logic. However, this definition borrows quite significantly from the title “informal”. And because of this, there are some disputes regarding the precise interpretation of “Informal Logic”. This paper seeks to present the three distinct informal logical facilities, which are Red Herring, False Cause, and Shifting the Burden of Proof. The presentation provides an example for each fallacy, how the fallacies were used and the context in which they occurred. Finally, it presents the manner of performing an argument to avoid fallacy.
Case 1: Red Herring Fallacy
The red herring fallacy occurs where there a distraction to divert the readers are audience from the main point in a discussion or conversation. Red herring fallacies might occur in political arenas where the politicians want to avoid the point raised by the public. Consider the following scenario “There have been rising criminal activities in the neighbourhood. But what we need is fast economic growth that I have already started implementing.” The main point here is “The Rising Criminal Activities”. However, the politician draws the attention of the audience from criminal activities to economic development. The politician could have avoided the red herring by addressing the issue of criminal activities other than economic growth.
Case 2: False Cause Fallacy
The False Cause Fallacy occurs when the real cause is identified incorrectly. Consider the following scenario; “I take the public means of transport to work daily. I once asked for a lift from my workmate, and we ended in a car accident. I have, since then never asked for lifts anymore.” In this scenario, the writer attributes the cause of the accident to her decision to ask for a lift. This is a false cause. The writer could avoid this fallacy by associating the accident to the traffic on the road, drivers, and the condition of the road among many other causes.
Case 3: The Burden of Proof
This type of fallacy occurs when a person makes a claim, fails to support the claim and instead, puts the blame on the other party. Consider the following scenario “A student claims that they are underfed during lunch-time. The teacher refutes the claim, and the student asks the teacher to prove that they are not underfed.” In this case, the burden of claim is placed on the teacher, yet it was not his/her claim. The student could have avoided this fallacy by supporting her/his claim.