This is a list of the three fallacies that have come up most frequently in my Belief-Scan Summaries, which were completed during the spring 2013 semester. I am going to list the fallacies in descending order, with the most persistent fallacy listed first, the second most persistent fallacy listed second, and the third listed last. I will include a brief discussion about what "antidotes" I have taken, or I plan to take to avoid each of these fallacies in the future.
The three fallacies that have come up most frequently in my Belief-Scan Summaries were: 1. Vague Terms (Meaning) 2. Smoke Screen (factual) 3. Had Things Been Different (Factual)
The first fallacy, “vague terms” is a fallacy of meaning. Fallacies of meaning are committed when the words used have no clear meaning, making difficult for the receptor of the message to truly understand your reasoning. I learned that I need to clarify the intended meaning of my words, if I want the receptor of the message to truly understand what I intend to say. Words can have more than one meaning: you may intend to say something one way and the receptor of your message can understand it in a totally different way, thus the need to be very clear in what you say. For example, you could say to your spouse in the heat of an argument: “I wish we had a normal family”. If you just leave at that and do not clarify your meaning, your spouse can understand this statement in many different ways. Now if you say “I wish we had a normal family where people talk to each other instead of yelling and screaming”, then your spouse will certainly understand what you are trying to say.
The “smoke screen” fallacy is a factual fallacy. This fallacy occurs when one attempts to justify a claim by using emotions instead of logical reasoning. You masquerade your true meaning by using a
