# data[].attributes.body
I chose an example of a fallacy from one of my favorite movies, Star Wars: A New Hope.
This is the famous scene where Obi-Wan tells the stormtroopers that these "are not the droids you are looking for". Obi-Wan used the logical fallacy known as "appeal to authority". He claimed to be a Jedi knight, and that the stormtroopers should trust him because of his status as a Jedi.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Star Wars Episode IV - A New Hope: These aren't the droids you're looking for [1080p HD]

# data[].attributes.body
Zaman, Farwa
This video describes logical fallacies, which in the video is described as "an error of reasoning that will weaken your argument, and in most cases, undermine it completely." Logical fallacies should be avoided when constructing your argument to ensure your argument has no flaws, makes sense to people, and comes across as intelligent rather than sounding like someone who doesn't know what they're talking about. There are types of logical fallacies that are talked about in this video. The first is circular reasoning, meaning instead of giving solid evidence or proof of a statement or argument you make, you just repeat the statement. The video uses an example of this by saying opium is sleep-inducing because it uses a sleep-inducing quality. You see how, instead of giving proof or examples, it just stated what was already known. We know it is sleep-inducing, but why is it sleep-inducing? Next is a hasty generalization. This is done when someone makes a statement they believe is true without knowing the full information on the subject, like when they claim all dogs are violent because they were attacked by one when they were younger. Of course, we know there are dogs who couldn't hurt a fly, but the person made a hasty generalization based on one encounter. The next logical fallacy is the slippery slope, where if one event happens, then a bunch of hypothetical situations will occur afterward, resulting in something bad. You can't use this logic for arguments because none of the situations leading up to the hypothetical ending are certain, so your argument will mean nothing when the events don't end up taking place. The straw man argument is twisting the words of the opponent they are arguing with to make it easier for themselves to have a comeback, or they twist and dramatize the words of their opponent to make a rebuttal. An ad hominem is taking jabs at your opponent's character to make it seem like what they're arguing doesn't have any value. The false dichotomy argument is when there are only two points given when there are many more options available. It creates a limit on the argument and doesn't allow anyone to go into depth. Like the argument "you're either with us or against us." Next is an appeal to emotion, which is using emotion-based words to persuade the other person to take your side instead of using facts and evidence. Equivocation, also known as a double-speak fallacy, is when multiple points are given in a misleading way to make your argument. The bandwagon appeal is when you present how a group of people feel or what a certain group of people follow to make the person feel persuaded to follow the same thing. This happens a lot nowadays with popular brands, where you are pressured into buying something not because you like it but because you'll fit in by following the trends. Lastly, the false analogy or weak analogy is when a small similarity is brought out by two unrelated things to make a point. Avoid these logical fallacies to have a strong and logical argument.

# data[].attributes.body
In this clip Wanda is talking to Dr. Strange about a girl named America Chavez. First Dr. Strange uses an ad hominem attacking Wandas character by insinuating she has been corrupted by the dark hold and later in the clip when he says she is justifying her actions like a villain. we then see Wanda uses an appeal emotions to try and get strange with bring up being happy. you can also somewhat find strange using hasty generalization when he says Wandas kids aren't real and she made them using magic, while this was somewhat true we find out later in the movie that her children are real.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
✂️ Wanda and Strange talking within the hex

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
60 seconds · Clipped by Britton Michael · Original video “Doctor Strange meets Wanda in the Garden. (4K) (DSMOM)” by MidnightVoids

# data[].attributes.body
We examine the logical connections between the premises and the conclusion to assess the veracity of an argument using truth tables.

1. Identify the argument's premises and conclusion. The assertions that underpin the conclusion are known as the premises.
2. Create a truth table that takes into account all potential alignments of truth values for the premises. Decide if each premise and the conclusion are true or untrue.
3. Using the truth table, assess the truth values of the premises and the conclusion. In each row when all the premises are true, determine if the conclusion is true. The argument is sound if the conclusion always holds true when the premises do. If not, it is not legitimate.
4. Consider the results in your everyday life. Think about whether the truth table findings match what we see or anticipate in real-world scenarios. Real-world examples should be included in good arguments.
Let's examine this argument, for illustration: Premise 1: If it's raining, the earth must be moist.
Premise 2: That it is pouring. In light of this, the ground is damp.
We may assess the argument using a truth table in the manner shown below:  | Premise 1 | Premise 2 | Conclusion |
|--------|--------|---------|
| True| True | True |
| True | False | False |
| False | True | False |
| False | False | False |
The truth table demonstrates that the conclusion is true whenever both premises are true. The conclusion is always true when the premises are true, hence the argument is sound.

# data[].attributes.body
This video is entitled Logical Fallacies and it discusses what a logical fallacy is and it discusses 5 fallacies along with examples of them. The video describes a logical fallacy as an error in logic and although it can look and sound convincing, upon further investigation the evidence is faulty. I chose this video because I liked the way that it simply explains logical fallacies and I like that for each fallacy discussed, there is a simple real life example to follow along with that helped me better grasp the ideas presented. The fallacies in this video are:

1.  Hasty generalization - the video describes this fallacy as making a conclusion about a large group only based on a smaller and arbitrary part of the group. The example of this fallacy is saying that based on the people I met at UT, I can say all students at UT hate the aggies.

2. Non sequitur - the video describes this fallacy as a conclusion without a clear connection to the evidence of the claim. The example used of this fallacy is that Valerie is a doctor and because of that she should be able to cure a sore throat.

3. Slippery Slope - this is described as a claim that there are extreme consequences resulting from an action without evidence. The example is if you don't attend a party, then your friends won't like you and then you'll never have any friends.

4. Bandwagon - this is describes as the argument that if everyone else is doing it, you should too. An example of this is everyone has the new iPhone so you spend all your savings just to buy it. Because this is based on social pressure and not actual evidence it is a logical fallacy.

5. Red Herring - this is a logical fallacy that is used a lot in media. It is when an irrelevant topic of discussion is introduced just to take away attention from the main issue. The example of this is if at a school board meeting about teaching styles, the teachers are debating the styles of teaching while one teacher that the teaching can't be improved until the budget is fixed.

These are all fallacies because they all present an error in logic.

# data[].attributes.body
Perry, Peyton
This video, very easily describes what logical fallacies are, and how they are used in real-world situations. Logical fallacies are errors in an explanation, that do not correlate or weaken the argument someone is presenting. I chose this video, because it is broken up into sections that make watching it much easier, and allow you to know what the topic the video is on. This video is a very nice length also, for those, like me who can not focus for a prolonged period of time.
false cause (straw man)- when two things happen at the same time, one does not actually cause the other. This is used to discredit other ideas or misrepresent a certain idea. This weakens the other argument and lets the one discrediting gain notability.
Begging - Having the conclusion in the reasoning, instead of evidence, and reasoning, weakens one's facts because there is no hard evidence, and only the conclusion/ opinion.
false dichotomy - a situation with an either/ or option, when there are numerous other options to choose from. This discredits an argument because there is not much evidence the conclusion is correct, due to the other possibilities.

# data[].attributes.body
Gross, Kimberly

Jared Henderson explains 19 of the most common fallacies that are used in arguments. He also provides basic examples to give a conclusive picture of the difference fallacies. In practice, it is difficult to determine the use of a logical fallacy and it requires a lot of exposure to identify them in arguments.

1. Ad Hominem - attacks the person arguing over the argument
2. Strawman - mischaracters an argument to refute that instead of the actual point
3. Appeal to Authority - uses only an expert to prove a point
4. False Dilemma - presents two choices as if they are the only options
5. Equivocation - misuses multiple definitions of a word to make a false point
6. Circular Argument - reasons with a question with the original premise
7. Hasty Generalization - claims made broadly with too little evidence
8. Comparative Fallacy - uses comparisons for a definitive answer
9. Post Hoc - claims causation because one event precedes another
10. Appeal to Ignorance - something is true because it is not false
11. Appeal to Nature - claims something that happens in nature is good
12. Appeal to Popularity - uses popular opinion for the truth of a claim
13. Guilt by Association - discredits a claim because it is related to an opposing group
14. No True Scotsman - protecting the claim by discrediting counterexamples
15. Fallacy of Composition - because the parts are true, the claim must be true
16. Fallacy of Division - because the whole is true, the parts are true
17. Appeal to Hypocrisy - disputes a claim because the arguer does not live up to their words
18. Burden of Proof Fallacy - shifts blame by claiming the argument to be disproved
19. Fallacy Fallacy - misdiagnosis of a fallacy that discredits an argument

I selected this video because it covers a wide variety of fallacies in a concise manner that is easy to follow. It also has decent editing and sound quality that does not interfere with the relaying of knowledge.

Some fallacies are used particularly often in real-life arguments, such as post hoc and the false dilemma. They can be used in arguments over a simple disagreement on position, which is definitely popular on social media. Many people use fallacies without realizing it as a means to win an argument so by being aware of these, one can avoid them to make a more sound argument.

# data[].attributes.headline
Miller-Fisher, Nicole - Reading Logical Fallacies

# data[].attributes.subject
Miller-Fisher, Nicole - Reading Logical Fallacies

# data[].attributes.body
Miller-Fisher, Nicole
My post is about covering the video about the topic, "Logical Fallacies", and why I chose this video is because it contains a variety of what the topics featured in the video are about to get a better insight of proving and defining logical arguments.

This is a video I found that is assigned for Unit 2, titled Reading Logical Fallacies, posted by Mometrix Academy on YouTube.

Reading Logical Fallacies (Mometrix Academy) - https://youtu.be/IawIjqOJBU8

First off, the video covers the following topics as well as the definitions and explanations about them:

Circular reasoning - when the argument is stated rather than proven. It is used when the argument is chosen as proof when explaining something that is considered either true or false. When doing an argument, it is "highly recommended to be as specific in your proofs rather than going back to the original argument for evidence (1:21)".

Hasty generalization - When someone makes a sweeping statement without considering all facts. This type of argument does not include any important information and data gathered when discussing arguments; the best way to avoid it is to "present and gather all aspects of the argument itself rather than leaving out important information (1:42-1:47)".

Slippery slope - A conclusion based on the premise that one small step will result into a chain of events resulting in some kind of significant event. In some arguments, the issue itself is "covered by hypotheticals unrelated to the argument's main idea, with no evidence to support or back up for the argument whatsoever (2:40)".

Straw man - Where someone distorts an opponent's claim so it is easier to refute or where someone tries to refute the point someone claims to make by giving rebuttals to a point they have not made to support the argument. Using this method, this argument is considered "an honest debate without any evidence or unfounded claims found in the argument itself (3:16)".

Ad hominem - An attack on a person's characteristics or attributes in order to discredit the argument. When using the method, the person "neither supports or uses evidence for the argument, but instead undermines or judges the other person's character without engaging with said person (3:42)".

False dichotomy - When an argument presents two ideas (or points) while disregarding or ignoring others to narrow the argument in someone's favor. This is also known as the "either/or" fallacy, which "drives the argument in a direction to incriminate or rebuke the opposing party (4:18)".

Appeal to Emotion - When a writer or speaker uses emotion-based language to try to persuade the audience to a certain belief or position. Generally speaking, when this method is used, a person's beliefs about unfairness or what is considered immoral to a quality of aspect gives little support or does not provide what is needed for a strong or objective argument.

Equivocation - When an argument is presented in an ambiguous yet two-sided method to make the argument sound misleading. To avoid this method is to be clear and concise with your wording and speech when providing claims and support for a certain argument.

Bandwagon appeal - An appeal that presents the thoughts of a group of people in order to persuade a person to think about something a certain way. In order to both parties to agree with this argumentative method, "one must accept or reject an argument based on peer pressure (5:54)".

False analogy - When two things are compared as unalike based on trivial similarity in order to support and further claims made in an argument. This is also known as a "weak analogy". It is "considered "absurd" because the analogy attempts to correlate one thing to another (6:31)" in comparison for evidence or claims to an argument.

In conclusion, when I took my Public Speaking course in the summer, I was surprised to see that these terms were featured in this video for Unit 2 of my Mathematical Ideas course, and it made me seem enthusiastic about learning more about them and their connections they make to the chapter themselves.

Sources cited:

Reading Logical Fallacies (Mometrix Academy) - https://youtu.be/IawIjqOJBU8

# data[].attributes.body
Perry, Kayla
This video discusses logical fallacies and how they are an error in reasoning that weakens your argument. I believe this video is very helpful because it discusses all the different types of common logical fallacies and how to avoid them. The first is circular reasoning, which is when an argument is restated instead of proven. Then there is hasty generalization which is a fallacy where someone makes a large statement without considering all the facts. Slippery slow fallacy is based on the idea that one event will lead to a chain of events. There is also Ad Hominem which is when you attack someones personal characteristics to try to discredit their argument. Appeal to emotion is a logical fallacy in which someone tries to evoke emotion in order to persuade a listener or reader. This video is good because she clearly describes each fallacy in a way that is easy to follow. She also breaks up the video into segments labeled with each fallacy and also adds cartoons or graphics to make it easier to understand.

# data[].attributes.body
The video opens with the narrator describing to avoid logical fallacies within your argument. She then describes logical fallacies as an error in reasoning that will severely weaken your argument and sometimes even undermine it entirely.
Here are the arguments the video covers.
Circular Reasoning-
Hasty Generalization-
Slippery slope-
Straw Man-Distorts original Claim.
Ad Hominem-Attack persons character to discredit them.
False dichotomy-
Appeal to emotion-
Equivocation-An ambiguous/ double sided argument.
Bandwagon Appeal- use groups thoughts to persuade someone.
False analogy - 2 things that aren't alike are compared with insignificant similarities.

Some terms aren't labeled because they are very straight forward.
I chose this video because I really like the thumbnail because it was crisp clean and looked more professional than other videos. Also here examples were very straight forward and the illustrations she used were clear and easy to understand. It as also a shorter length video and easier to digest.

The results of the video indeed make sense. I have seen many of these fallacies all over the internet and in many different movies I just lacked a name for them until now. This has made me realize just how evident logical fallacies are in my everyday life.

# data[].attributes.body
Cole, Lindsey

The video I have posted in our Padlet is by Crash Course explaining Logical Fallacies or as called in this video "Philosophical Reasoning". I absolutely adore Crash Course it has always been my go to for any videos on explaining any matters that I didn't understand throughout my college years and even in high school.

This video talks about how in arguments many people try to talk more loudly or more aggressively than the other to get their points across as being correct even if they are indeed wrong. The logical fallacy is trying techniques like those instead of coming up with an actual logical argument based on facts and evidence from research you have done. This video takes a little bit different view on logical fallacies, instead it informs you on how to argue correctly and steer clear or the inconsistency.

In could definitely use this in my life by researching things more clearly, our media has poisoned so many people's brains into thinking things are one way when they could be completely different. So, to put in the time and research you can be well versed on a topic before getting into a conversation about the topic of choice.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
How to Argue - Philosophical Reasoning: Crash Course Philosophy #2

# data[].attributes.body
Wilson, Anthony

The video I found is called Logical Fallacies by CIVIX. The video explains what a logical fallacy is and describes each of the listed fallacies:

1. Authoritative argument
2. Slippery slope
3. Appeal to tradition
4. Personal attack
5. False dilemma
6. Strawman argument

I chose this video because it is short, and it also went into detail about the different logical fallacies.

# data[].attributes.body
Evan, Jean

This video I found is called Logical Fallacies by Philosophy Vibe and he briefly explains what logical fallacies are the gives 13 fallacies. The fallacies that were shown are
- false cause
- appeal to emotion
- strawman
- slippery slope
- ad hominem
-  Tu Quoque
- loaded question
- burden of proof
- band wagon
- appeal to authority
- black or white
- question begging
- fallacy
While talking about each fallacy he shows examples in each fallacy and how it would be used. I picked this video because it is short but also very informing and not complicated.

# data[].attributes.body
GCF Learn Free conducted this easy to understand video on logical fallacies. The video describes why people are more likely to fall for certain fallacies and how to detect them. The following fallacies are mentioned and more:
- ad hominem
- bandwagon appeal
-false dichotomy
-straw man
-begging
-black or white
-appeal to authority
And more

I found this video to be the best as it is short and concise. I prefer shorter easy to understand videos hence why I chose this one! It also was super informational and helpful to better understand the assigned material

# data[].attributes.body
Riddle, Jules

The Critical thinker goes over what a fallacy is and what a fallacy is made of. He breaks down each segment of a fallacy and how to identify them while also showing you how to build the symbolic form so you have a visual representation of what is going on.

I chose this video because I've been struggling with breaking down the word sections of the logic problems. Making the tables has been easy but finding each part to build out the tables has been difficult. After watching this video a few times, it began to click on how to break down the word problems into sections and know what to look for.

I think the video helps a lot with real life, Kevin breaks down what makes a bad argument and how to look at something that can be taken for true and see if it is a fallacy. Fallacies are everywhere in real life so identifying them is a great skill.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Critical Thinker 006 | Introduction to Fallacies

# data[].attributes.body
The video I found is called "Logical Fallacies by GCFLearnFree" HE describes the meaning behind the term and gives examples.
The reason I chose this video is because right of the bat, he goes straight into giving an example that is crazy. So he definitely catched my attention and he explained what logical fallacies is in just under 4 minutes, which is super important to me as I am able to stay focused. He was able to stay entertaining the whole video.

The results out of this makes sense because it occurs in real life and can have a significant impact on discussions, debates, decision-making, and critical thinking.   People often use logical fallacies in everyday conversations, unintentionally or intentionally, to support their arguments or to persuade others.

# data[].attributes.body
Lopez, Devan

Jill Bearup covers various logical fallacies used in discussions and debates. It touches on a wide range of fallacies, including strawman arguments, ad hominem attacks, appeals to emotion, appeals to authority, red herrings, false dichotomies, and many more.

Additionally, she provides examples of each logical fallacy she brought up.

I chose this video because it helps me recognize and avoid these fallacies to have more productive discussions. It also highlights that just because someone uses a fallacy doesn't necessarily mean their conclusion is wrong, as pointed out in the fallacy fallacy.

These results make sense because logical fallacies can be tempting in real-life discussions because they offer shortcuts to persuade or discredit, but they often hinder productive communication by relying on flawed reasoning rather than sound arguments.

# data[].attributes.body
Kirby-Duran, Victoria

The video that I have found it called 'Reading Logical Fallacies' by Mometrix Academy. Within the video she talks about 10 different fallacies that are often used on a daily basis without realizing it.
The fallacies that were discussed are...
- Circular Reasoning
- Hasty Generalization
- Slippery Slope
- Straw Man
- Ad Hominem
- False Dichotomy
- Appeal to Emotion
- Equivocation
- Bandwagon Appeal
- False Analogy
While discussing the different types of fallacies she even provided one or two different examples of how it is used.
My reasoning behind picking this video is simply because I found it to be easy to watch and it wasn't overly complicated to a point that it got confusing. I enjoyed that she used real life examples to help better understand the concepts behind each fallacy.
The results of the this makes sense considering how often it tends to play a role in peoples life without even realizing it. Often times or not many use these fallacies in an everyday argument and even in life making decisions.

# data[].attributes.body
In this video, Jared Henderson explains 19 common fallacies that people often use in their arguments. These fallacies can be used intentionally or unintentionally, but they are ultimately flawed and weaken the argument.

1. Ad Hominem: attacking the person instead of their argument.
2. Appeal to Emotion: using emotions to sway an argument instead of presenting facts.
3. Appeal to Authority: using an authority figure as evidence for an argument.
4. Appeal to Tradition: believing something is true or valuable simply because it has been done that way for a long time.
5. Bandwagon: believing something is true or valuable simply because a lot of people believe it.
6. Black or White: presenting only two extreme options as the only possibilities in an argument.
7. False Cause: assuming that because one thing happened before another that it caused it.
8. False Dilemma: presenting only two options as the only possibilities in an argument.
9. Hasty Generalization: making a broad conclusion based on limited evidence or overly specific examples.
10. Circular Reasoning: using the desired conclusion as the evidence for an argument.
11. Slippery Slope: believing that one action will inevitably lead to another, more extreme action.
12. Strawman: distorting or exaggerating an argument in order to make it easier to attack.
13. Red Herring: introducing an irrelevant topic or argument in order to distract from the original argument.
14. False Analogy: comparing two things that are not actually similar in order to make a point.
15. Personal Incredulity: dismissing an argument based solely on personal lack of understanding or knowledge.
16. Tu Quoque: pointing out that someone has been guilty of the same thing they are arguing against.
17. The Fallacy Fallacy: assuming that an argument is false simply because it contains a fallacy.
18. False Equivalence: comparing two things that are not actually comparable in order to make a point.
19. Begging the Question: assuming the conclusion of an argument in the premise.

Jared Henderson also provides examples of each fallacy and explains why it is problematic. He encourages viewers to identify these fallacies in arguments in order to strengthen their critical thinking skills and avoid making flawed arguments themselves.

I chose this video because it's not only easy to understand, but it's also very logical. Like False Equivalence, it means to compare two different things that aren't the same to make a point.

These results do make sense in real life some of which are also inscripted into our DNA as it's Human nature to have logical fallacies. If anything, these logical fallacies are what make us human and it's human nature to have have logical Fallacies.

# data[].attributes.body
First READ attentively what is required to submit.  Please only respond to the specific questions that I am asking (and therefore grading).
You are working as a team here . Support your fellow classmates, watch the videos they submitted, comment if you liked them!

Logical Fallacies

I am asking here to upload the videos on logical fallacies that you found on Youtube or in the movies
Illustrate it with a picture or cartoon. Please do NOT use anything related to the politics. Try uploading the videos that are captioned.
When  picking the video on logical fallacies:

1. Summarize briefly the content of your video

2. Explain, why you chose it.

3. Reflect if your results  make sense in real life.