7 Logical Fallacies You and Trump Are Guilty of Committing

7 Logical Fallacies You and Trump Are Guilty of Committing

Image for post

Our current POTUS is notorious for his astounding capability to lie and deceive. Most often via utter falsehood (?We?re the highest-taxed nation in the world? ? we?re not), sometimes using insults (?[he has] the biggest ears I?ve ever seen? ? his ears are fine), and frequently through logical fallacies.

The New York Times published a compilation of Trump?s lies, including this graph which highlights the first day Trump went without a public lie or falsehood since taking office (Spoiler alert: it was not until the 40th day).

Image for postFrom The New York Times: ?Trump?s Lies?

Also from the New York Times is a fun list of the people, places, and things that Trump has ever insulted, including (but not limited to) one of my favourites:

Image for postRoughly translates to ?haters gon? hate, hate, hate, hate, hate?

Disgraceful? Certainly.

But are we, as honourable, respectable, and noble citizens of the high society totally, and 100%, guilt-free of committing the same sins as President Trump?

Here are 7 logical fallacies that Trump (and you!) have committed.

1. Questionable Cause:

From Latin, cum hoc ergo propter hoc, assuming a causal connection simply because they are regularly associated.

What Trump has said:

Image for post

What you have said:

?It?s funny how every time I go out with you, I get hit on by banker bros.? [Assuming your friend is a banker-bro-magnet when it very well may be that banker bros are just being banker bros]

2. Ad Hominem (To-the-Man):

From Latin, ad hominem, criticizing the person?s appearance, character, and personality, rather than the position they are defending.

What Trump has said:

Image for post

What you have said:

?You can?t take his career advice too seriously?he?s a vegan.? [Criticizing someone?s ability to provide professional advice by attacking their character choice to eat tempeh]

3. Strawman:

Over-simplifying, distorting, and attacking a ?strawman? rather than a person?s actual argument since the person may have never said such a thing.

What Trump has said:

Image for postFrom ?4 Logical Fallacies from the Third Clinton Trump Debate?

What you have said:

?I?m not saying that there is anything wrong with the keto diet but I?m just not really down to have like, a tub of lard for dinner.? [Equating a high-fat, low-carb diet to ?like, a tub of lard?]

4. Red Herring:

From Latin, ignoratio elenchi, a diversion or distraction from the actual issue at hand.

What Trump has said:

Image for post

What you have said:

?He seemed kind of sexist over drinks last night, but his bumble profile says he writes songs so I?m going to stick around in case he gets Spotify Singles famous.? [Using the fact that your bumble date is mildly musically-inclined to distract you from the actual issue that he is (most probably) a raging sexist]

5. Texas Sharpshooter:

Also known as Cluster Illusion, ignoring the differences while focusing only on the similarities, and cherry-picking data points to make a point or come to an inaccurate conclusion.

What Trump has said:

Image for postFrom Hey Girl Communique: Spotting Logical Fallacies this Election Season

What you have said:

?I just thought well, we both love cats and Coachella, we?ll probably make great roommates.? [Coming to the conclusion that you and said stranger are roommates made in heaven based solely on your shared love for cats and flower crowns]

6. Hasty Generalization:

Jumping to conclusions based on biased generalizations.

What Trump has said:

Image for post

What you have said:

?50 bucks. Lesbian.?(seeing someone in Doc Martens) [Generalizing that those who wear Doc Martens, play for the other team]

7. Argument from Ignorance:

From Latin, argumentum ad ignorantiam, assuming something is true because it has not yet been proven false.

What Trump has said:

Image for post

What you have said:

?If you?re still playing Pokemon Go, you?re probably not getting laid.? [Assuming this is true because technically, it has never been proven false]

Thank you for reading! ?

Did you enjoy this piece? Let me know by clapping or leaving a comment below! ???

1

No Responses

Write a response