Relevance
What makes an argument relevant?
Provides justification to support the conclusion
Gives support to another relevant premise
Issues relating to relevance
Ad hominens
Contains an appropriate analogy
Attacks the claim rather than the person putting forward the claim
Informal fallacies, known as 'attacking the person'
Ad hominen abusive - a person responds to the first persons argument by verbally abusing them
Ad hominen Tu Quoque - an attack on a person by focusing on their past words/actions instead of the truth of their correct claims
Circumstantial Ad hominen - someone attempts to attack a claim by asserting that the person making the claim in making it out of self-interest
There are situations where 'attacking the person' is not fallacious, e.g. in some situations an aspects of a person may undermine their testimony
Fallacious appeal to emotion:
Poor analogies:
An attempt to make someone else accept something as true based on how they feel about it instead of the facts in support of their claim
The arguer may offer true information in a way that it distracts people from making decisions of appropriate grounds
May not be fallacious because it may be relevant
Truth - are the two things similar in the way they are claimed?
Relevance - is the comparison relevant to the conclusion?
Number - are there multiple similarities that strengthen the conclusion?
Disanalogy - are there relevant differences between the things that can weaken the argument?