This lesson plan may be intertwined with any readings involving persuasive arguments. Attached is a list of fallacies to which students might refer throughout the year. The list is divided into two sections: "deceptive arguments" and "reasoning fallacies." The list of deceptive arguments might be used to analyze campaign rhetoric during an election; reasoning fallacies often occur in persuasive writing.

To raise awareness of fallacies which often appear in persuasive arguments

Photocopy the attachment for distribution to each student in the class.

1. Assign a fallacy to each student and have the student write a paragraph which includes an example of that fallacy. When the students turn in their paragraphs, redistribute them randomly and have the recipients guess the fallacy being demonstrated. Each group could present their favorite example with an explanation of the type of fallacy. Don't worry about "right" answers; the same argument could fall under several types of fallacies. The entire list of fallacies may be too overwhelming; you may wish to conduct this activity with a partial list (e.g. only the "deceptive arguments" list).
2. Ask students to contribute examples of fallacious arguments found in the media; their contributions could include identification of the type of fallacy. These could be posted on the class CTWeb or collected in a physical notebook that students could use as a reference. Students could be awarded prizes and/or extra credit points for each contribution, and this compilation of examples could continue throughout the year.
3. The book "Thinking for Yourself" by Marlys Mayfield is full of great class activities which explore fallacies.

Student assessment:

Students will demonstrate success in being aware of fallacious arguments if they identify and explain fallacious arguments in the course of any of the above activities.

Project assessment:

Success of this lesson will be demonstrated if students identify fallacious arguments in later assigned readings.

TYPES OF FALLACIES

(excerpts from the book "Thinking for Yourself" by Marlys Mayfield)

Deceptive Arguments

Trickery with language:

1. word ambiguity: a central word is never defined or is left unclear (e.g. "drug"--legal or illegal? "virtually"--how much is that?)
2. euphemisms: inoffensive words used in place of words that might be considered offensive, frequently used to mask unacceptable situations (e.g. "contributions" instead of taxes, "police action" instead of unproclaimed act of war)
3. prejudicial language: use of words that carry evaluations ("cult," "propaganda," "dirty little war")
4. equivocation: giving the same voice accent to saying something meaningless as to saying something meaningful, usually to evade an issue (e.g. preceding a statement with a disclaimer: "to the best of my knowledge," or ducking a question: Will you raise taxes? "Budget planning is complicated.")

Trickery with Emotions

5. appeal to fear (often found in product or campaign advertising)
6. appeal to pity (often found in charity advertising)
7. appeal to false authority:

7a) the major or only support for the argument is a false, vague, or questionable authority (e.g. "Michael Jackson uses Yummy toothpaste," "doctors say…").

7b) the authority of tradition or of popular wisdom ("a real American stands when the flag passes," "everybody knows…")

8. appeal to prejudice: Prejudice means the adoption of an attitude of rejection; flaws in an argument (or missing support in an argument) may be disguised by stirring up prejudice.

8a) personal attack: name-calling, innuendo, personal criticisms irrelevant to the issue

8b) poisoning the well: discrediting a person, idea, or cause at the outset to discourage people from wanting to know more about it

Trickery with Distraction

9. red herring: introduction of irrelevancies to throw the listener/reader off track; often the red herring proves a point but not the point being addressed
10. straw man: construction of a faulty replica of an issue which can then be easily knocked down (e.g. "You shouldn't complain about cruelty to animals; look at how cruel animals are to each other.")
11. pointing to another wrong: an attempt to justify an objectionable action by appealing to similar situations that were overlooked (e.g. "You can't give me a ticket for running that red light; the car next to me did the same thing!")
12. circular reasoning: supporting a conclusion with a rewording of the conclusion (e.g. "Foster care is important because people should provide homes for children in need.")

Reasoning fallacies

13. the hasty generalization: a conclusion reached prematurely without sufficient study of the evidence ("My date stood me up; all men are inconsiderate.")
14. the either-or fallacy: a presumption that there are only two possibilities ("Do you have a large circle of friends or only a few friends?")
15. the questionable statistic: confusion or deception in the use of statistics (You can find these in the news reports every day!)
16. inconsistencies and contradictions: conflicting premises ("All men are equal, but some are more equal than others.")
17. the loaded question: questions designed to bias toward a certain answer ("Are you going to be good and do what I say?")
18. the false analogy: An analogy draws a parallel between two ideas or principles; in a false analogy, the differences between the two may invalidate the argument. ("They say too much cigarette smoking is harmful; too much applesauce is harmful.")
19. false cause: insistence on a causal connection that doesn't exist, including:

19a) blaming the wrong target

19b) scapegoating: picking out one person or one situation as the cause of the problem

19c) cause determined by an event happening after another event ("Wearing pink helps make friends; I've made lots of friends since I started wearing pink.")

19d) confusing cause and effect

20. the slippery slope: arguing that permitting one event to occur will set off a chain reaction ("Sex education leads to teen pregnancy." "If welfare is too easy to obtain, everyone will go on welfare.")
21. logical equivocation: drawing an unwarranted conclusion from premises by shifting the meaning of a word (e.g. "Man is the only thinking animal; man is not an animal; therefore nothing thinks." The word "animal" shifts its meaning.)