Editing Fallacy (section)

== Overview ==
Fallacies are types of erroneous reasoning that render arguments [[Soundness|logically unsound]].<ref>{{Cite web |title=Definition of fallacy |url=https://www.dictionary.com/browse/fallacy |access-date=2023-02-18 |website=www.dictionary.com |language=en}}</ref> According to The New Handbook of Cognitive Therapy Techniques, they include "unsubstantiated assertions that are often delivered with a conviction that makes them sound as though they are proven facts".<ref name="The new handbook of cognitive...">{{Cite book |last=McMullin |first=Rian E. |title=The new handbook of cognitive therapy techniques |date=2000 |publisher=W.W. Norton |isbn=978-0393703139 |edition=Rev. |location=New York |oclc=41580357}}</ref> Informal fallacies, in particular, are frequently found in mass media such as television and newspapers.<ref name="McMurty1990">{{Cite journal |last=McMurtry |first=John |date=December 1990 |title=The mass media: An analysis of their system of fallacy |journal=Interchange |volume=21 |issue=4 |pages=49–66 |doi=10.1007/BF01810092 |s2cid=144780081}}</ref> Understanding fallacies may allow one to recognize them in either one's own or others' writing. Avoiding fallacies may help improve one's ability to produce sound arguments.<ref>{{Cite web |date=14 March 2017 |title=The Importance of Logical Fallacies |url=https://thelogicofscience.com/2017/03/14/the-importance-of-logical-fallacies/ |access-date=4 February 2023 |website=thelogicofscience.com}}</ref>

It can be difficult to evaluate whether an argument is fallacious, as arguments exist along a continuum of soundness and an argument that has several stages or parts might have some sound sections and some fallacious ones.<ref name="DeLancey_Handout">{{Cite web |last=DeLancey |first=Craig|title=Evaluating Arguments – Distinguishing between reasonable and fallacious tactics |url=https://writingcenter.ua.edu/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/evaluatingarguments.pdf |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130903171329/http://writingcenter.ua.edu/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/evaluatingarguments.pdf |archive-date=2013-09-03 |access-date=7 March 2018 |website=oswego.edu |publisher=self-published}}</ref> Moreover, whether a specific argument is fallacious often depends on the content rather than the form of the argument. An example is a [[Validity (statistics)|probabilistically valid]] instance of the formally invalid argument form of [[denying the antecedent]] or [[affirming the consequent]]. <ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Godden |first1=David |last2=Zenker |first2=Frank |date=2015-03-05 |title=Denying Antecedents and Affirming Consequents: The State of the Art |url=http://ojs.uwindsor.ca/ojs/leddy/index.php/informal_logic/article/view/4173 |journal=Informal Logic |volume=35 |issue=1 |pages=88 |doi=10.22329/il.v35i1.4173 |issn=0824-2577 |doi-access=free}}</ref>  Thus, "fallacious arguments usually have the deceptive appearance of being good arguments, <ref name="Damer 2009">{{Citation |last=Damer |first=T. Edward |title=[[Attacking Faulty Reasoning]]: A Practical Guide to Fallacy-free Arguments |page=52 |year=2009 |edition=6th |place=Belmont, California |publisher=Wadsworth |isbn=978-0-495-09506-4 |author-link=T. Edward Damer}}</ref> because for most fallacious instances of an argument form, a similar but non-fallacious instance can be found". Evaluating an instance of an argument as fallacious is therefore often a matter of evaluating the context of the argument.   

Recognizing fallacies in everyday arguments may be difficult since arguments are often embedded in [[rhetoric]]al patterns that obscure the logical connections between statements. Informal fallacies may also exploit the [[emotion]]al, intellectual, or [[psychology|psychological]] weaknesses of the audience. Recognizing fallacies can develop reasoning skills to expose the weaker links between premises and conclusions to better discern between what appears to be true and what is true.

[[Argumentation theory]] provides a different approach to understanding and classifying fallacies. In the [[pragma-dialectics|pragma-dialectical theory]], for instance, an argument is regarded as an interactive protocol between individuals who attempt to resolve their disagreement on the merits of a case.<ref>{{Cite book |last=Frans van |first=Eemeren |url=http://worldcat.org/oclc/1048664485 |title=Argumentation Theory : a Pragma-Dialectical Perspective |date=2018 |publisher=Springer International Publishing |isbn=978-3-319-95380-9 |oclc=1048664485}}</ref> The protocol consists of [[Pragma-dialectics|normative rules of interaction]], and violations of these rules are considered fallacies because they frustrate the attempt at resolving the disagreement.

Fallacies are used in place of valid reasoning to communicate a point with the intention to persuade. Examples in the [[mass media]] today include but are not limited to [[propaganda]], [[advertisement]]s, [[politics]], newspaper editorials, and opinion-based news shows.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Fallacies in Propaganda |url=https://www.termpaperwarehouse.com/essay-on/Fallacies-In-Propaganda/5CEBA75592A5824A |access-date=4 February 2023 |website=www.termpaperwarehouse.com}}</ref>