search

Become an active member of our fallacy-discussing community (or just become a lurker!)

Prejudicial Language

(also known as: variant imagization)

Description: Loaded or emotive terms used to attach value or moral goodness to believing the proposition.

Logical Form:

Claim A is made using loaded or emotive terms.

Therefore, claim A is true.

Example #1:

All good Catholics know that impure thoughts are the work of the devil, and should be resisted at all costs.

Explanation: The phrase “all good Catholics” is the loaded or prejudicial language being used.  The implication is that Catholics who don’t resist impure thoughts are “bad Catholics”, which is not fair -- they may just not be as strong willed, or perhaps they don’t agree with the Church's views on sex.

Example #2:

Students who want to succeed in life will do their homework each and every night.

Explanation: The assertion is that students who don’t do their homework every night don’t want to succeed in life, which is bad reasoning.  Perhaps the student is sick one night, tired, doesn’t understand the work, or was busy making out with his father’s secretary in the office supply closet next to the memo pads.  The point is, dad, you cannot assume that just because I skipped homework a few nights that it means I didn’t want to succeed in life!

Exception: This is often used for motivation, but even if the intent is honorable, it is still fallacious.

Tip: Prejudicial language can be a powerful and effective persuasion tool. Use it in addition to a well-reasoned argument, not in place of one.

References:

Damer, T. E. (2008). Attacking Faulty Reasoning: A Practical Guide to Fallacy-Free Arguments. Cengage Learning.

Questions about this fallacy? Ask our community!

Eat Meat... Or Don't.

Roughly 95% of Americans don’t appear to have an ethical problem with animals being killed for food, yet all of us would have a serious problem with humans being killed for food. What does an animal lack that a human has that justifies killing the animal for food but not the human?

As you start to list properties that the animal lacks to justify eating them, you begin to realize that some humans also lack those properties, yet we don’t eat those humans. Is this logical proof that killing and eating animals for food is immoral? Don’t put away your steak knife just yet.

In Eat Meat… Or Don’t, we examine the moral arguments for and against eating meat with both philosophical and scientific rigor. This book is not about pushing some ideological agenda; it’s ultimately a book about critical thinking.

Get 20% off this book and all Bo's books*. Use the promotion code: websiteusers

* This is for the author's bookstore only. Applies to autographed hardcover, audiobook, and ebook.

Get the Book