![]() |
Academic Support |
| Cuesta Home | Academic Support Center | Academic Support | Disabled Student Programs & Services | Tutorial Services |
Recognizing Propaganda Techniques
|
Contradiction: |
Information is presented that is in direct
opposition to other information within the same argument. Example: If someone stated that schools were overstaffed, then later argued for the necessity of more counselors, that person would be guilty of contradiction. |
Accident: |
Someone fails to recognize (or conceals the
fact) that an argument is based on an exception to the rule. Example: By using selected scholar-athletes as the norm, one could argue that larger sports programs in schools were vital to improving academic performance of all students. |
False Cause: |
A temporal order of events is confused with
causality; or, someone oversimplifies a complex causal network. Example: Stating that poor performance in schools is caused by poverty; poverty certainly contributes to poor academic performance but it is not the only factor. |
Begging the Question: |
A person makes a claim then argues for it by advancing grounds whose meaning is simply equivalent to that of the original claim. This is also called "circular reasoning." Example: Someone argues that schools should continue to have textbooks read from cover to cover because, otherwise, students would not be well-educated. When asked to define what "well-educated" means, the person says, "knowing what is in the textbooks." |
Evading the Issue: |
Someone sidesteps and issue by changing the topic. Example: When asked to say whether or not the presence of homosexuals in the army could be a disruptive force, a speaker presents examples of homosexuals winning combat medals for bravery. |
Arguing from Ignorance: |
Someone argues that a claim is justified simply because its opposite cannot be proven. Example: A person argues that voucher programs will not harm schools, since no one has ever proven that vouchers have harmed schools. |
Composition and Division: |
Composition involves an assertion about a whole that is true of its parts. Division is the opposite: an assertion about all of the parts that is true about the whole. Example: When a school system holds up its above-average scores and claims that its students are superior, it is committing the fallacy of division. Overall scores may be higher but that does not prove all students are performing at that level. Likewise, when the military points to the promiscuous behavior of some homosexuals, it is committing the fallacy of composition: the behavior of some cannot serve as proof of-the behavior of all homosexuals. |
Poisoning the Well: |
A person is so committed to a position that he/she explains away absolutely everything others offer in opposition. Example: Almost every proponent and opponent on the ban on gays in the military commits this error. |
| Ad Hominem: |
A person rejects a claim on the basis of derogatory facts (real or alleged) about the person making the claim. Example: Someone rejects President Clinton's reasons for lifting the ban on gays in the military because of Mr. Clinton's draft record. |
| Appealing to Force: |
Someone uses threats to establish the validity of the claim. Example: Opponents of year-round school threaten to keep their children out of school during the summer months. |
Appeal to Authority: |
Authority is evoked as the last word on an issue. Example: Someone uses the Bible as the basis for his arguments against specific school reform issues. |
Appeal to the People: |
Someone attempts to justify a claim on the basis of popularity. Example: Opponents of year-round school claim that students would hate it. |
Appeal to Emotion: |
An emotion-laden "sob" story is used as proof for a claim. Example: A politician uses a sad story of a child being killed in a drive-by shooting to gain support for a year-round school measure. |
click here > to read Belorussian translation (provided by Webhostinggeeks)