Fallacies of Weak Induction

Fallacies of weak induction occurnot beacuse the premise are logically irrelevant to the conclusion as is the case with the eight fallacies of relevance, but because the connection between the premise and conclusion is not strong enough to support the conslusion. They often involve emotional grounds for believing the conclusion.

9. Appeal to Unqualified Authority (Argumentum as Verecundiam)
This fallacy is a variety of the argument from authority and occurs when the cited authority or witness lacks credibility. There are 3 areas where discredibilty might occur (1) no expertise, (2) misplace authority, and (3) overlooking biased

Example:
Dr. Bradshaw, our family physician, has stated that the creation of muonic atoms of deterium and tritium hold the key to producing a sustained nuclear fusion reaction at room temp. In view of Dr. Bradshaw's expertise as a physician, we must conclude that this is indeed true.

10. Appeal to Ignorance
When the premise of an argument state that nothing has been proved one way or the other about something, and the conclusion then makes a definite assertion, about that thing, then the argument comits an appeal to ignorance.

Example:
People have been trying for centuries to disprove the claims of astrology, and no one has ever succeeded. Therefore, we must conclude that the claims of astrology are true.

11. Hasty Genralization (Converse Accident)
This fallacy affects inductive generalizations. It occurs when there is a resonable likelihood that the sample is not a representative of the group. Such likelihood may arise if the sample is too small or not randomly selected

Example:
Ten Arab funfamentalist hijacked planes and crashed them into the World Trade Center in NYC. The message is clear: Arabs are nothing but a pack of relogious fanatics prone to viloence.

12.False Cause
Occurs whenever the link between premises and conclusion depends on some imagined causal connection that probably does not exist. It has 4 types of fallacy.

a. Post hoc ergo propter hoc ("after this, therefore account of this")
Presupposes that just because one event preceded another event the first event causes the second event.

b. Non cause procause ("not the cause for the cause")
Committed when what is taken ot be the cause of something is not really the cause at all and the mistake is based on something other than more temporal succeession.

c. Oversimplified cause
Occurs when a multitude of causes is responsible for a certain effect but the arguer selects just one cause of these causes and represents it as if it were the sole cause.
Example: The quality of education in our grade schools and high schools has been declining for years. Clearly our teachers jsut aren't doing their job these days.

d. Gamblers fallacy
committed whenever the conclusion of an argument depends on the suppostion that independent events in a game of chance are causally related.
Example: A fair coin was flipped in a row and each time it came up heads. Therefore, it is extremely likely that it will come up tails on the next flip.

13. Slippery Slope
It ocurs when the conclusion of an argument rest upon an alleged chain reaction and there is not sufficient reason to think that the chain reaction will actually take place.

Example:
Immediate steps should be taken to outlaw pornography once and for all. The continued manufacture and sale of pornographic material will almost ceratinly lead to an increase in sex-related crimes such as rape and incest. This in turn will gradually erode the moral fabric of society and result in an increase in crimes of all sorts. Eventually a complete disintegration of law and order will occur, leading in the end to the total collapse of civilization.

14. Weak Analogy
This fallacy is committed when the analogy is not strong enough to support the conclsion that is drawn.

Example: Harper's new car is bright blue, has leather upholstery, and gets excellent gas mileage. Crowley's new car is also bright blue and has leather upholstery. Therefore it probably gets excellent gas mileage too.