Statement #35 Discussion
2 comments (1 thead) All Discussions | Below is the statement as it appears with the fallacy marked as correct. You can see the totals of most frequent responses to this statement. And after reading the any discussion going on below, you can select your choice(s) for the correct answer. For now, whoever posts each statement can update corrections. |


Appeal to Belief
Category: Fallacies of Relevance (Red Herrings) Appeal to Belief is a fallacy that has this general pattern:
There are, however, some cases when the fact that many people accept a claim as true is an indication that it is true. For example, while you are visiting Maine, you are told by several people that they believe that people older than 16 need to buy a fishing license in order to fish. Barring reasons to doubt these people, their statements give you reason to believe that anyone over 16 will need to buy a fishing license. There are also cases in which what people believe actually determines the truth of a claim. For example, the truth of claims about manners and proper behavior might simply depend on what people believe to be good manners and proper behavior. Another example is the case of community standards, which are often taken to be the standards that most people accept. In some cases, what violates certain community standards is taken to be obscene. In such cases, for the claim "x is obscene" to be true is for most people in that community to believe that x is obscene. In such cases it is still prudent to question the justification of the individual beliefs. ![]() |
Appeal to Emotion
Category: Fallacies of Relevance (Red Herrings) → Distracting Appeals An Appeal to Emotion is a fallacy with the following structure:
This sort of "reasoning" is very common in politics and it serves as the basis for a large portion of modern advertising. Most political speeches are aimed at generating feelings in people so that these feelings will get them to vote or act a certain way. In the case of advertising, the commercials are aimed at evoking emotions that will influence people to buy certain products. In most cases, such speeches and commercials are notoriously free of real evidence. This sort of "reasoning" is quite evidently fallacious. It is fallacious because using various tactics to incite emotions in people does not serve as evidence for a claim. For example, if a person were able to inspire in a person an incredible hatred of the claim that 1+1 = 2 and then inspired the person to love the claim that 1+1 =3, it would hardly follow that the claim that 1+1 = 3 would be adequately supported. It should be noted that in many cases it is not particularly obvious that the person committing the fallacy is attempting to support a claim. In many cases, the user of the fallacy will appear to be attempting to move people to take an action, such as buying a product or fighting in a war. However, it is possible to determine what sort of claim the person is actually attempting to support. In such cases one needs to ask "what sort of claim is this person attempting to get people to accept and act on?" Determining this claim (or claims) might take some work. However, in many cases it will be quite evident. For example, if a political leader is attempting to convince her followers to participate in certain acts of violence by the use of a hate speech, then her claim would be "you should participate in these acts of violence." In this case, the "evidence" would be the hatred evoked in the followers. This hatred would serve to make them favorable inclined towards the claim that they should engage in the acts of violence. As another example, a beer commercial might show happy, scantily clad men and women prancing about a beach, guzzling beer. In this case the claim would be "you should buy this beer." The "evidence" would be the excitement evoked by seeing the beautiful people guzzling the beer. This fallacy is actually an extremely effective persuasive device. As many people have argued, peoples' emotions often carry much more force than their reason. Logical argumentation is often difficult and time consuming and it rarely has the power to spurn people to action. It is the power of this fallacy that explains its great popularity and wide usage. However, it is still a fallacy. In all fairness it must be noted that the use of tactics to inspire emotions is an important skill. Without an appeal to peoples' emotions, it is often difficult to get them to take action or to perform at their best. For example, no good coach presents her team with syllogisms before the big game. Instead she inspires them with emotional terms and attempts to "fire" them up. There is nothing inherently wrong with this. However, it is not any acceptable form of argumentation. As long as one is able to clearly distinguish between what inspires emotions and what justifies a claim, one is unlikely to fall prey to this fallacy. As a final point, in many cases it will be difficult to distinguish an Appeal to Emotion from some other fallacies and in many cases multiple fallacies may be committed. For example, many Ad Hominems will be very similar to Appeals to Emotion and, in some cases, both fallacies will be committed. As an example, a leader might attempt to invoke hatred of a person to inspire his followers to accept that they should reject her claims. The same attack could function as an Appeal to Emotion and a Personal Attack. In the first case, the attack would be aimed at making the followers feel very favorable about rejecting her claims. In the second case, the attack would be aimed at making the followers reject the person's claims because of some perceived (or imagined) defect in her character. This fallacy is related to the Appeal to Popularity fallacy. Despite the differences between these two fallacies, they are both united by the fact that they involve appeals to emotions. In both cases the fallacies aim at getting people to accept claims based on how they or others feel about the claims and not based on evidence for the claims.
Another way to look at these two fallacies is as follows
![]() |
Appeal to Flattery
AKA Apple Polishing, various 'colorful' expressions Category: Fallacies of Relevance (Red Herrings) → Distracting Appeals An Appeal to Flattery is a fallacy of the following form:
![]() |
919 Total Answer Attempts 76%
700 Correctly Popped Fallacies
219 Incorrectly Un/Popped


Most Common Responses295 - Appeal to Emotion 86 - Appeal to Flattery 20 - Appeal to Tradition 19 - Appeal to Popularity 19 - Appeal to the Consequences of a Belief 14 - Begging the Question 14 - Gambler's Fallacy 12 - Red Herring 10 - Ignoring a Common Cause 10 - Hasty Generalization 10 - Special Pleading 9 - Biased Generalization 8 - Genetic Fallacy 8 - Appeal to Authority 8 - Confusing Cause and Effect 7 - Fallacy of Composition 6 - False Dilemma 5 - Misleading Vividness 5 - Appeal to Common Practice 5 - Circumstantial Ad Hominem 5 - Relativist Fallacy 4 - Appeal to Novelty 4 - Fallacy of Division 4 - Burden of Proof 3 - Peer Pressure 3 - Ad Hominem Tu Quoque 2 - Post Hoc 1 - Guilt by Association 1 - Poisoning the Well 1 - Appeal to Ridicule 1 - Slippery Slope 1 - Middle Ground |
Show All Comments On One Page Threads Sorted by Date - Sort by Likes |
+ |
OMG this is the most clear cut appeal to flattery
This is text book appeal to flattery... do this not only because we are rich and powerful... um calling someone rich and powerful is flattery
+ Reply 1 comment downstream. Please read it before replying. ![]() | ||
+ |
Login - High Scores - About - Trivium - Links - Contact
Donate To DontFallacy.Me - Support Dr. Labossiere
* Fallacious statements are usually paired with a random image of a person who never spoke those words.
This free site is for educational purposes, studying intellectual dishonesty. The images are being used under fair use. Sunflower by robstephaustrali.