by Elizabeth M Young

Created on: January 23, 2010

We often have a sense that something is wrong when a fast talking person is trying to hustle us in an argument. The problem lies in calming the situation down and in finding the time to break down the statements so that we can find the cause of the discomfort. This is our "truth" alarm going off, but we cannot figure out where the lie or the ploy resides in the argument!

One of the first and most frequently described components of argument is the premise. A flawed argument will have a flawed premise that is either untrue, is greatly exaggerated, omits uncomfortable facts, or includes irrelevant facts.  When a person states anything, "anything" can be questioned and challenged as to source, proof, factuality, correctness and comprehensiveness. 

The next component of an argument can include claims about the relationships or conditions of relationship between entities. If a then b. If not a, then c, and so on. These relationships can be questioned, broken down and challenged. Does A truly cause B? What is the strength of the effect of A on B? What is the type of effect of A on B?  Many logical fallacies in argument involve faulty or false claims of relationships, cause and effect, factual comparisons, sound equations and correct assumptions. Requiring an explanation of all of the assumptions and an evaluation of all of the relationships, equations and strengths of supporting fact can take the steam out of many fallacious arguments.

Generalizing to whole populations based on unproven assumptions, guesses, unidentified statistical sources, limited observations, too few observations, false claims and statements, cherry picked evidence, and other unfair ploys is another cause of deliberately flawed argument. The audience for, and speakers who use such argument are firmly determined to stay with their position, and such arguments are more about engaging in affirming behavior than they are about logical, truthful or convincing statements.

Conceptual and logical gaps are a signs of a clearly flawed argument. Attempts to ignore continuums, to simplify complex situations and entities by simply leaving out the aspects that are too difficult to understand, and inability to take care of the "Five questions" of who, what, when, where, how and why, are indicators that the argument is taking on an issue that is far too complex for singular or simplistic conclusions, or that the

• 1
• 2
• Next Page >>