Rhetorical Proof

Proof established through interaction between the speaker adn the listeners; provides support for a conclusion but not assurance that it is true.

*justifies claims, but does not guarentee proof

specific instances used to illustrate a more general claim

*most common reasoning pattern is inference from example

i.e. believing that most politicians cannot be trusted, a citizen infers that meither of the candidates for mayor can be trusted (specific instance, and general claim)

Fallacy of Composition

Fallacy of Division

Assuming that what is true of the part is automatically true of the whole

Assuminng that what is true of the whole is true of the parts

Analogy

Literal analogy

 Figurative analogy

a comparison of people, places, things, events, etc.

a direct comparison of objects, people, or events

i.e. "Illinois will not be able to escape the recession, which has already hit Michigan- another Midwestern industrial state" (directly comparing Michagin adn Illinois)

A comparison of the relationships between objects, people, or events.

i.e. "Depending on Social Security for your retirement income is like playign Russian roulette with your future."

1. physical observation

2. statistical indexes

3. institutional regularity

Regarding something that can be observed as a sign of someting that cannot.

i.e. when you wake up and see the sun shining, you can infer that it is morning time.

(you physically observe the sun, but can not physically observe morning)

a statistical measure that is taken as a sign of an abstraction

i.e. high scores on exams are a sign of intelligence. (a statistical index that we can see is regarded as a sign of something that we cannot see)

a sign relationship that results from norm or social convention

i.e. because athletic competitions usually begin with the singing of the national anthem, if you turned on the tv and heard the song, you might infer that a game is about to begin.

inference that one thing affects another

i.e. gas prices go up, sales go down

Common Cause Fallacy

Post hoc Fallacy

Assuming that one thing causes another when in fact a third factor really is the cause of both

 post hoc "after this"- assuming that because one thing occured after another, that the first thing caused the second thing

Expert Testimony

Lay Testimony

testimony from a person who is generally recognized as an authority on a particular subject

Testimony froma person who is not an expert

*citing opinions of "ordinary people"

the quality of striking a responsive shord with listeners, causing them to identify with what one is saying

*listeners will realize that you are telling the story in order to connect with them, not specifically to intertain them.

a claim that "on it's face" is unrelated to the supporting material

*latin for "it does not follow"

Having multiple meanings

*allows inferences to be open to interpretation = you don't want that!