Question

...
Ed F

What Is This Common Fallacy?

What's fallacy is the best fit for this:

Puffing, such as in advertising?  (example:  this brownie is "mouth watering good".)

asked on Thursday, Jan 13, 2022 01:46:45 PM by Ed F

Top Categories Suggested by Community

Comments
...
0
Ed F writes:

Just to clarify the question, the fallacy is to describe something with flowery terms that are not necessarily related in any way to the item described, with the intent of making that object seem attractive and therefore (conclude) that it is desirable.   This is found in countless advertisements.

Not sure what fallacy this would fall under.  It's a type of distraction and therefore Red Herring.

 

 

posted on Thursday, Jan 13, 2022 05:57:53 PM
...
1
Ed F writes:

No that is not what a red herring is, in this context this is not an argument at all.

posted on Thursday, Jan 13, 2022 07:33:27 PM
...
0
Ed F writes:
[To River]

Sorry my first posting didn't lay out the Argument, which is:

You should buy Product A because of X, where X is not related to the merits of A, but instead is a description of A in flowery terms that are intended to appeal to the listener's desire to be pleased, pampered etc.  

The argument is not based on a rational connection between the premise and conclusion and therefore is a fallacy (of some type).

[ login to reply ] posted on Thursday, Jan 13, 2022 07:59:28 PM

Want to get notified of all questions as they are asked? Update your mail preferences and turn on "Instant Notification."

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

Answers

...
Bo Bennett, PhD
0

Puffery is not a fallacy. Fallacies are limited to the context of arguments.

answered on Thursday, Jan 13, 2022 08:03:24 PM by Bo Bennett, PhD

Bo Bennett, PhD Suggested These Categories

Comments
...
0
Ed F writes:

Just wanted to make sure you saw my clarification to my original question:

Sorry my first posting didn't lay out the Argument, which is:

You should buy Product A because of X, where X is not related to the merits of A, but instead is a description of A in flowery terms that are intended to appeal to the listener's desire to be pleased, pampered etc.  

The argument is not based on a rational connection between the premise and conclusion and therefore is a fallacy (of some type).

posted on Thursday, Jan 13, 2022 08:18:33 PM
...
1
Bo Bennett, PhD writes:
[To Ed F]

The argument is really an opinion as indicated by the word "should." There is no truth claim being made here. Maybe the consumer wants to be pleased, pampered, etc.? Then it would make sense for them to buy the product if it delivers those things. Advertising gets a pass on fallacies... it is in a category of its own like persuasion techniques.

[ login to reply ] posted on Thursday, Jan 13, 2022 08:41:56 PM
...
0
Ed F writes:
[To Bo Bennett, PhD]

I see that "Puffery" is listed in your book, but under "Lies."

[ login to reply ] posted on Friday, Jan 14, 2022 08:21:30 PM