Fallacies are common forms of bad arguments;
although flawed they are more psychologically
compelling than they should be. One reason for this
is that they often resemble forms of good arguments.
This talk will discuss the difference between formal
and informal fallacies, with examples of each, as
well as the good arguments that they resemble.
Formal fallacies to be discussed will include
fallacies of propositional logic as well as
syllogistic fallacies. Informal fallacies to be
discussed will include fallacies of irrelevance,
fallacies of ambiguity, and fallacies of unwarranted
assumptions.
Douglas E. Hill got his bachelor's
degree in Mathematics/Computer Science from the
College of Idaho, a master's in Biomathematics from
UCLA, and a master's and Ph.D. in Philosophy from
U.C. Irvine. His research was in rational choice
theory, and the title of his dissertation is
"Reputation in a world of errors and corruption."
While at UCI he founded "Students
for Science & Skepticism", a skeptical student club,
and hosted "Campus Talk UCI" on KUCI radio
88.9 FM. He is currently an adjunct professor
of Philosophy at Cal State Fullerton where he
teaches classes in Critical Thinking and Logic, from
which the material for this talk is taken.