It can be difficult to determine a communication fallacy and easy to fall for it when you are not paying attention. It can also be possible when you may not know what kind of fallacies are there and what you should look for. This can be seen in many articles and social media posts.
For example, @RealAlexJones on Twitter wrote a post stating that "If the statistical trend continues with this tragic event, there is a 98% chance the shooting is trans or gang related. If it is another trans wack job or a gang shooting, it will be out of the news in less than 24 hours.." There was not a single source listed about the statistics of trans or gang-related shooting. He also used the term "trans wack job" which seems like the post is transphobic. The video has not stated anything about the school shooter's identity (or mention of LGBTQ+ identity) due to the fact that they had no information. This would be an example of an appeal to ignorance fallacy.
The first article I have decided to analyze for fallacies was this one talking about vaccinations and neurodevelopmental disorders (NDD).
This article is an example of a false cause fallacy. In the article it states, "The results of this study add to a growing body of evidence suggesting that vaccination may be associated with significantly increased odds of various medical conditions, including NDDs." (Mawson, Jacob, 2025) From our lecture, a false cause fallacy is where an event follows another. The first event (vaccination) causes the second event (increase in medical conditions). Just because it was found that an increase of a diagnosis rate for neurodevelopmental disorders after vaccines, does not mean that vaccines cause NDDs. Further research outside of this article has proven that vaccinations do not cause Autism (one of the neurodevelopmental disorders). The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) have provided some information about whether or not there is a link between Autism and vaccinations. There are plenty of other studies out there that proves this to be false with a search through google scholarly articles or other libraries.
The second article I have chosen to analyze for fallacies was this article talking about their views on how pets are not children.
This article is an example of a hasty generalization fallacy. According to the lecture, a hasty generalization fallacy is where someone draws conclusion with insufficient evidence. For example, they may draw conclusion from one event that happened to them with a specific person and think that everyone else like them does the same thing. This article has not provided evidence and has drawn conclusions from what they see about people calling their pets children. "When people with pets take the title of “parent” and blur the line between pets and children, our language is distorted in a way that only adds to our confusion and anxiety." (Wallace, 2016)
Where is the evidence that pets do not develop similarly to children? How do we know that it contributes to our confusion and anxiety as stated in the article when we consider ourselves parents to our animals? The author jumps to conclusions that when people call pets their children, they are comparing it to having human children. There have been a study recently in the past few years utilizing MRI scans on dogs and their odor with their owners. This study showed that it activated the reward center in dogs' brains when taking in the smells of their owners. There was also another study that focused on humans' brains when it comes to both pictures of children and dogs. The people who participated the study were women who had children and dogs. The photos of both children and dogs activated similar regions that focus on emotion, reward, and more. Again how do we know that it contributes to negative thinking and emotions?
The final article I have chosen was this article talking about democrats and USPS. I would say this article utilizes the ad hominem fallacy. I think this article is also a really good example to show what not to do when spreading attention to a certain issue, topic, or whatever. In the lecture, it states that this fallacy is where a person attacks another. This article uses the words outraged and fiery in the title to attack democrats. Democrats throughout this article also seems to be utilized as an insult in a way. Similar to the example used for ad hominem in the lecture, "dumb blonde," but in this case it is "outraged democrats."
As mentioned before, it is a good example of what not to do when spreading attention to a certain thing. If you are going to spread news to people, it might be good to avoid using "Outraged Democrats," as it can make it look like you are biased to a certain party. This can contribute to spreading misinformation to others. You should also avoid trying to use outraged and fiery or other similar words unless these words are actually needed.
Communication fallacies can be difficult to find, however it can also be easy to accidentally use a fallacy from what I have learned, especially if it stems from our personal biases. This is why it is crucial to try your best to identify a fallacy from someone else and make sure you are not utilizing a communication fallacy in your writing. This can help you communicate more effectively and get your ideas out there without spreading misinformation and/or negativity.
References:
Berns, G. S., Brooks, A. M., & Spivak, M. (2015). Scent of the familiar: An fmri study of canine brain responses to familiar and unfamiliar human and dog odors. Behavioural Processes, 110, 37–46. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.beproc.2014.02.011
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (n.d.). Autism and vaccines. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. https://www.cdc.gov/vaccine-safety/about/autism.html
Crusius, T., & Channell, C. (2016). The aims of argument: A text and reader (8th ed.). McGraw-Hill Education.
Jones, A. (2024, December 16). RealAlexJones. Twitter. https://x.com/RealAlexJones/status/1868726031865332115
Mawson, A. R. (2025, January 23). Vaccination and neurodevelopmental disorders: A study of nine-year-old children enrolled in Medicaid. Science, Public Health Policy and the Law. https://publichealthpolicyjournal.com/vaccination-and-neurodevelopmental-disorders-a-study-of-nine-year-old-children-enrolled-in-medicaid/
Stoeckel, L. E., Palley, L. S., Gollub, R. L., Niemi, S. M., & Evins, A. E. (2014). Patterns of brain activation when mothers view their own child and dog: An fmri study. PLoS ONE, 9(10). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0107205
Wallace, M. A. (2016, October 27). Sorry, but you’re not your dog’s mom. The Cut. https://www.thecut.com/2016/10/pets-are-not-children-so-stop-calling-them-that.html
Comments
Post a Comment