A Pragmatic Analysis of Fallacies in English Religious Argumentative Discourse

Authors

  • Khawla Shukur Mahmood General Directorate of Education in Diayla
  • Sundus Muhsin Ali College of Arts/ University of Baghdad

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.31973/aj.v3i141.3730

Keywords:

Fallacies, Straw man, Argument from ignorance, red herring, The argument against the person

Abstract

       Fallacies are common errors in an argument and they undermine the logic of that argument. They obstruct the process of argumentation since they do not contribute to the resolution in difference in opinion. The current study investigates fallacies in four religious argumentative debates between Muslims and atheists.  It adopts Toulmin et al (1984) as a model for analysis. Results show that both debating parties, Muslims and atheists commit fallacies but the latter exceeds the former quantitatively and qualitatively. The most common fallacies in Muslims’ arguments are straw man argument, poisoning the well and attacking the person whereas the straw man argument, argument from ignorance, hasty generalization and appeal to compassion are the most committed ones by atheists.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Damer, T. (2009). Attacking Faulty Reasoning: A Practical Guide to Fallacy-Free Arguments. Belmont: Wadsworth Cengage Learning.

Freeley, A. and Steinberg, D. (2008). Argumentation and Debate Critical Thinking for Reasoned Decision Making. Wadsworth: Cengage Learning.

Gula, R. (2007). Nonsense: Red Herrings, Straw Men and Sacred Cows: How We Abuse Logic in Our Everyday Language. Mount Jackson: Axios Institute.

Larson-Hall, J. (2010). A Guide to Doing Statistics in Second Language Research Using SPSS. New York: Routledge.

van Eemeren, F. and Grootendorst, R. (1983). Speech Acts in Argumentation. Dordrecht: Foris Publications.

Walton, D. (1987). Informal Fallacies: Towards a Theory of Argument Criticisms. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing.

Walton, D. (1998). Ad Hominem Arguments. Alabama: Alabama University Press.

Walton, D. (2006). Fundamentals of Critical Argumentation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Tindale, C. (2007). Fallacies and Argument Appraisal. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Toulmin, S., Reike, R., Janik, A. (1984). An Introduction to Reasoning. New York: Macmillan publishing co.

Online References:

https://www.quora.com/How-is-the-ad-hominem-fallacy-different-from-poisoning-the-well

Downloads

Published

2022-06-15

Issue

Section

English linguistics and literature

How to Cite

Mahmood, K. S., & Ali, S. M. (2022). A Pragmatic Analysis of Fallacies in English Religious Argumentative Discourse. Al-Adab Journal, 3(141), 15-30. https://doi.org/10.31973/aj.v3i141.3730

Publication Dates

Similar Articles

11-20 of 518

You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.