Page 57 - Žagar, Igor Ž. 2021. Four Critical Essays on Argumentation. Ljubljana: Pedagoški inštitut.
P. 57
fallacies: do we ‘use’ them or ‘commit’ them? ...
critical discussion are never mentioned again. This is the very same way
DHA deals with topoi (see previous chapter).
Eight years after the Discourse and Discrimination was published, in
Wodak’s The Discourse of Politics in Action, we get the following definition
of fallacies:
Reisigl and Wodak (2001) also draw on van Eemeren and
Grootendorst (1992) and Kienpointner (1996) when providing the
list of general common fallacies, which includes the following very
frequently employed argumentative devices: argumentum ad bac-
ulum, i.e. ‘threatening with the stick’, thus trying to intimidate in-
stead of using plausible arguments; the argumentum ad hominem,
which can be defined as a verbal attack on the antagonist’s per-
sonality and character … instead of discussing the content of an
argument; the fallacy of hasty generalization, when making gener-
alizations about characteristics attributed to a group without any
evidence; and finally, the argumentum ad populum or pathetic fal-
lacy, which consists of appealing to prejudiced emotions, opin-
ions and convictions of a specific social group or to the vox popu-
li instead of employing rational arguments. (Wodak 2009: 43–45)
An attentive reader has no doubt noticed that the list of references got
shorter, that the list of 14 fallacies from D&D got a new denomination: ‘gen-
eral common fallacies’ (without any explanation how ‘general common’ is
defined, or what constitutes ‘general common’ fallacies in relation to less
‘general common’ fallacies), and that within these ‘general common falla-
cies’ an even narrower list for ‘very frequently employed’ fallacies was con-
structed. It is just these four fallacies that are used in the analyses that fol-
low. Let us have a look how.
Detecting fallacies in the Discourse of politics in action
The Discourse of Politics in Action: Politics as Usual is a book about European
politics, more precisely, about how politics is done—in all possible details—
in the European parliament. In her own words, Wodak wanted to
find out ‘how politics is done’, ‘what politicians actually do’, and
‘what the media convey about how politics is done’. Moreover, I
also wanted to probe the implications of the public’s lack of knowl-
edge about the behind-the scenes reality of ‘politics as usual’ in an
era of politics that many characterize in terms of an increasing
57
critical discussion are never mentioned again. This is the very same way
DHA deals with topoi (see previous chapter).
Eight years after the Discourse and Discrimination was published, in
Wodak’s The Discourse of Politics in Action, we get the following definition
of fallacies:
Reisigl and Wodak (2001) also draw on van Eemeren and
Grootendorst (1992) and Kienpointner (1996) when providing the
list of general common fallacies, which includes the following very
frequently employed argumentative devices: argumentum ad bac-
ulum, i.e. ‘threatening with the stick’, thus trying to intimidate in-
stead of using plausible arguments; the argumentum ad hominem,
which can be defined as a verbal attack on the antagonist’s per-
sonality and character … instead of discussing the content of an
argument; the fallacy of hasty generalization, when making gener-
alizations about characteristics attributed to a group without any
evidence; and finally, the argumentum ad populum or pathetic fal-
lacy, which consists of appealing to prejudiced emotions, opin-
ions and convictions of a specific social group or to the vox popu-
li instead of employing rational arguments. (Wodak 2009: 43–45)
An attentive reader has no doubt noticed that the list of references got
shorter, that the list of 14 fallacies from D&D got a new denomination: ‘gen-
eral common fallacies’ (without any explanation how ‘general common’ is
defined, or what constitutes ‘general common’ fallacies in relation to less
‘general common’ fallacies), and that within these ‘general common falla-
cies’ an even narrower list for ‘very frequently employed’ fallacies was con-
structed. It is just these four fallacies that are used in the analyses that fol-
low. Let us have a look how.
Detecting fallacies in the Discourse of politics in action
The Discourse of Politics in Action: Politics as Usual is a book about European
politics, more precisely, about how politics is done—in all possible details—
in the European parliament. In her own words, Wodak wanted to
find out ‘how politics is done’, ‘what politicians actually do’, and
‘what the media convey about how politics is done’. Moreover, I
also wanted to probe the implications of the public’s lack of knowl-
edge about the behind-the scenes reality of ‘politics as usual’ in an
era of politics that many characterize in terms of an increasing
57
