We have all used a fallacy of logical thinking during an argument, that I am certain of it. I have personally because the statement I just made was indeed a logical fallacy, Fallacy of Accident: A generalization that disregards exceptions. These endless list of potential logical fallacies are difficult to not only navigate and understand but almost impossible adapt to. From the time mankind began to speak and comprehend the world around us, we have been rationalizing our world through logical fallacies. We had to because human beings simply didn’t have enough knowledge that would prevent us from doing so, and those who don’t know or don’t wish to comply with this logical reasoning simply made it obsolete. If I rationally formulate an argument, avoiding all possible fallacies but my verbal combatant embraces the fallacies carelessly in their argument, I can call them upon these fallacies but little will change if those observing our argument or the person them self has little or no grasp of these fallacies. I can fully understand why we all partake in these fallacies; because these logical fallacies demand that a problem is always assessed pragmatically and objectively. The list of fallacies to avoid, removes all emotional aspects from arguments which is often a key aspect to any quarrel we engage in. The list demands clarity in arguments, the removal of disguising eloquent phrasing to present merely the premise and conclusion in a logical format that can be understood by all. However humans cannot void themselves of such passions and intangible feelings which often drive many of the world’s most controversial debates. Speaking skills are often solely based on how well you can persuade those around you through often logical fallacies such as false dilemmas, divine fallacies, non sequiturs, circular thinking, straw man defence, and red herring fallacies; we often rally the emotional support of others and disguise the validity of our argument. Many great speakers and especially politicians and religious figures consistently use these fallacies to mis construe our understanding of their arguments. As oppose to presently the logical premises and conclusion they divert our attention with illogical idea connections, provocative language and manipulation of popular attitudes and emotions to win our belief and support. In order for these fallacies to be avoided, everyone would need to be educated on them and preferable from a relevantly young age. It would completely alter the social fabric of our society because it would force arguments to become transparent and objective stances between opposing factions on an issues; removing the other irrelevant spiritual and emotional aspects from it. However such as world is almost an impossibility because our society is plagued with fallacies; mass cohorts of citizens who are beguiled with unreasonable deductions and irrational thought processes which allow us to stand by our beliefs and our emotional driven ethics and morals.
