Give examples of the fallacies of relevance/irrelevance

(a) Appeal to the people or masses (argumentum and populum)
If numbers are quoted as evidence or justification for a certain position or conclusion, the fallacies is said to have been committed. For example, if someone is to argue that abortion, corruption, theft or murder is wrong because most people think that it is wrong, this would be an instance of this fallacy. The point to note is that the truth of falsity of something does not depend on people's opinions or feelings, rather other objective facts. The majority could believe that something is right or wrong yet all be mistaken. Question of truth and falsity, rightness or wrongs are not settled by conducting opinion polls, rather they are settled by appeal or consideration of relevant facts.

(b) Appeal to Authority (argumentum and verecundiam)
This fallacy is said to have been committed when one accepts a statement view or position merely because an authority, expert, or a famous person accepts it or says he/she accepts it. The truth of falsity of a given statement cannot be proved merely by the fact that someone, even an authority says so. A statement is not made true or false by virtue of the prestige of an authority, rather, it is the citing of relevant and accurate evidence to confirm or refute the statement. The fact than an authority has made a statement cannot be itself regarded as evidence; it is the facts which the authority produces that constitute evidence. Such facts of course are quite different from a mere verbal pronouncement e.g. Killing is bad or stealing is bad not merely because God or the law says so, rather because of the objective and cogent facts and evidence that points reasonably or necessarily to the badness or goodness, rightness or wrong's of the actions. Killing is bad for instance, presumably because of some good reasons which form the basis of God or the law holding that it is bad not merely because Gor or the law says so. Appeal to authority rests on trust and confidence rested in authority (which is reasonable), but authority is fallible and its only on the basis of the evidence presented that we should accept the position of the authority not the mere fact of authority.

(c) Appeal to force (Argumentum and Baculem) or threat of force.
This fallacy is said to have been committed when assent is sought on the basis of the use of force or threat of force. It is not might that makes something right or true. Might or the threat of force is irrelevant when it comes to matters of truth or rightness of an action. For example, it would be fallacious if one reasoned that the United States of America war right in 1990 with regard to the Iraq Kuwait despite merely because Iraq was forced into submission. A preacher who argues that salvation is imperative because otherwise one would go to hell commits this fallacy because the threat of hell may compel one to declare salvation without having any objective reasons to justify the choice of salvation. The fear of the eternal suffering in hell would in that case be the reason for adopting salvation not the more reasonable grounds of love, peace, harmony and the general well being of the individual and specify that come as a result of salvation such that avoidance of hell is just an accident.

(d) Appeal to ignorance (Argumentum and Ignorantiam)
This fallacy is said to occur when it is argued that a certain view, opinion belief or assertion is true just because it has not been proved false, or conversely that it is false because it has not been proved true. This happens when the premises of an argument state that a certain position or view has into been proved (or disproved) while the conclusion makes a definite assertion abort the position. This sought of reasoning is treacherous because it apparently seems to follow and actually pretends to follow the justified reasoning that a certain view is true because we have considerable evidence, all of which shows that the view is true, and none of which shows that it is false. Showing that a view is true simply because there is no contrary evidence is not enough.
It is imperative also to show positive evidence in favor of it. Otherwise outrageous claims for instance of the existence of mermaids may be 'proved' by this treacherous kind of reasoning which is logically unacceptable.

(e) Argument against the person (Argumentum and Hominem)
The above fallacy is said to have been committed when a rebut to the argument or position held is not directed to the basis, evidence or premis(es) upon which the position rests but rather to the person against whom the rebut is intended.

(f) Appeal to pity (Argumentum and miserecordiam)
This fallacy is said to be committed when emotions of pity or mercy are invoked for purposes of achieving or ensuring assent. For example, when one reasons that a person should be exonerated from punishment for his/her wrongdoing because he is an orphan widow or widower or has gone through a certain traumatizing experience, not as mitigating facts but as sufficient grounds, then such reasoning is fallacious. The fact that one is an orphan for example does not make one not subject to punishment or blame for committing evils, just the same way being an orphan would not be excuse for committing evils.

(g) Fallacy of accident
The fallacy is said to have been committed when one reasons by applying a general rule to a particular instance which is uniquely circumstances rendering the general inapplicable. For example when one reasons that because the constitution grants freedom of movement and association that therefore it is not right to prevent public rallies held by some individuals or group in the country, the fallacy would have been committed.

(h) Fallacy of converse Accident
It proceeds by an inappropriate ascription of what holds for particular unique case to the general cases which do not experience the same and unique circumstances that the particular experiences that renders or
justifies whatever it is that holds for the unique particular. For example reasoning that since cigarette smoking increases the chances of suffering from cancer by predisposed or vulnerable individuals that then cigarette smoking should be stopped or baned altogether.

---

francis1897 answered the question on October 4, 2022 at 11:09