Ignoratio Elenchi (Or Missing the Point)ĬLINTON: It was personal e-mails, not official.ĬLINTON: Not - well, we turned over 35,000, so…” This example also contains a “Tu Quoque (you too) fallacy” by claiming that if Bill Clinton did something similar or worse, then what Trump did would be “not so bad”. Ad hominem fallacies are also a form of red herring. In this example, Donald Trump attacks Bill Clinton, his opponent’s husband, instead of answering to the argument levied against him on the comment he made about how he treats women. So you can say any way you want to say it, but Bill Clinton was abusive to women.” Donald TrumpĪn Ad Hominem is attacking the opponent’s character, personality, race, or family rather than the content of the argument. There’s never been anybody in the history politics in this nation that’s been so abusive to women. But that was something that happened.If you look at Bill Clinton, far worse. I am a person who has great respect for people, for my family, for the people of this country. This example also contains a circular argument fallacy since the main point, this election is important, is true by definition since all presidential elections are important. The examples she uses do not prove that point: the person will be elected for 4 years the appointment of a new Supreme Court judge is not something exceptional as Obama, Bush and Bill Clinton appointed two judges each and energy has been on the table for at least the past two decades. In this example, Hillary Clinton creates a false sense of urgency and fear as support for her point that this election is different. It’s one of the most consequential elections that we’ve had.” Hillary Clinton.Īn appeal to emotion is the manipulation of emotion in order to win an argument. We are going to be choosing a president who will set policy for not just four or eight years, but because of some of the important decisions we have to make here at home and around the world, from the Supreme Court to energy and so much else, and so there is a lot at stake. This is not an ordinary time, and this is not an ordinary election. “So I believe that this election has become in part so - so conflict-oriented, so intense because there’s a lot at stake. The example is also a form of appeal to ridicule by using ISIS to make his taped comments appear unimportant/ridiculous in comparison and appeals to emotion. In the example given, Donald Trump uses a red herring, the fight against ISIS, to distract from the main point which is about the comments he is heard saying on a recording from 2005. And I will tell you, I will take care of ISIS.” Donald Trump on the 2005 video that was released prior to the debate.Ī red herring fallacy is when one misleads or distracts from the main issue. ISIS happened a number of years ago in a vacuum that was left because of bad judgment. But it’s locker room talk, and it’s one of those things. Let’s look at 5 logical fallacies from the second presidential debate between Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump held on Tuesday, October 4, 2016. A logical fallacy is a flaw in reasoning that lead to false assertions.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |