Fallacies made by second year students of fast track program ulis vnu in the debate activity

VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HANOI UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES FACULTY OF ENGLISH LANGUAGE TEACHER EDUCATION FALLACIES MADE BY SECOND-YEAR STUDENTS OF FAST TRACK

VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HANOI

UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES

FACULTY OF ENGLISH LANGUAGE TEACHER EDUCATION

FALLACIES MADE BY SECOND-YEAR

STUDENTS OF FAST TRACK PROGRAM, ULIS,

VNU IN THE DEBATE ACTIVITY

Supervisor: Dương Thu Mai Student: Đặng Thị Phượng Course: QH2012.F1.E1

HÀ NỘI – 2016

ĐẠI HỌC QUỐC GIA HÀ NỘI

TRƯỜNG ĐẠI HỌC NGOẠI NGỮ

KHOA SƯ PHẠM TIẾNG ANH

KHÓA LUẬN TỐT NGHIỆP LỖI LẬP LUẬN SINH VIÊN CHẤT LƯỢNG CAO NĂM 2, ĐHNN, ĐHQG MẮC PHẢI TRONG HOẠT

ACCEPTANCE PAGE

I hereby state that I: Dang Thi Phuong, 12E1, being a candidate for the degree of Bachelor of Arts (TEFL) accept the requirements of the College relating to the retention and use of Bachelor’s Graduation Paper deposited in the library

In terms of these conditions, I agree that the origin of my paper deposited

in the library should be accessible for the purposes of study and research, in accordance with the normal conditions established by the librarian for the care, loan or reproduction of the paper

Signature

Date

i

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

First and foremost, I would like to express my most sincere gratitude and appreciation to Ms Duong Thu Mai (Ph.D.) for her continuous support, her immense knowledge, patience and enthusiasm I am blessed to have her as a supervisor in working on this dissertation Without her precious guidance, I certainly would not have been able to overcome all the obstacles and completed this whole paper

In addition, my great thanks go to Ms Dinh Hai Yen (M.A.) for her invaluable help with the data analysis process

I am also indebted to all the research participants including three teachers and second-year students of Fast Track Program, ULIS, VNU They have been always willing to cooperate in every data collection procedure

Last but not least, none if this would have been possible without the assistance of my family and close friends It is their love, concern and encouragement that have guided me throughout this endeavor

ii

ABSTRACT

With an investigation into the situation of fallacy commission among second-year students of Fast Track Program, ULIS, VNU, this research targets at (1) discovering the types of fallacies students made in the debate process and (2) defining the effects those fallacies have on learners’ debate performance and the debates, and (3) diagnosing students’ present knowledge about logical fallacies

To realize the given aims, the research exploits three kinds of data collection methods comprising observation, interview and survey Not only content analysis but also statistical analysis was utilized

The result taken from the questionnaire and observation shows that despite being quite critical to recognize the presence of some fallacies, all students lack insightful knowledge about logical fallacies and that in comparison with formal fallacies, informal types are much more difficult to handle Besides, while observation data analysis reveals eleven fallacies made by the students, which is a relatively significant number, the interview result indicates that those logical errors are the root of different problems concerning the effectiveness of students’ debate performance and the debates

The research results all suggest a greater emphasis on the practice of logical fallacy learning and teaching

ii

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS AND CONVENTIONS

FELTE: Faculty of English language teacher education

ULIS: University of Languages and international studies

VNU: Vietnam National University

MCQs: Multiple-choice questions

TFQs: True-False questions

%: percent

iii

LIST OF TABLES

ii

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 2 Students’ knowledge about logical fallacies 54

Figure 3 Accuracy rates of responding to MCQs and TFQs

in the questionnaire

57

6

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Acknowledgements i

Abstract ii

List of abbreviation iii

List of tables iv

List of figures v

Table of contents vi

PART 1: INTRODUCTION 1

1 Statement of problem and rationale for the study 1

2 Aims and objectives 2

3 Significance of the study 3

4 Scope of the study 3

5 Organization 4

PART 2: DEVELOPMENT 5

Chapter 1: Literature Review 5

1 Critical thinking and arguments 5

1.1 Critical thinking in education 5

1.2 Arguments 7

1.2.1 Definition 7

1.2.2 Elements of an argument 8

1.2.3 Types of arguments 10

7

1.2.4 Qualities of valid, strong, good and sound arguments 11

2 Logical fallacies in arguments 12

2.1 Definition 12

2.2 Classifications 12

3 Oral debate activity in education and in English learning 26

3.1 Overview of general debates 26

3.1.1 Definitions 26

3.1.2 Features of good debates 27

3.1.3 The roles of sound arguments in debates 27

3.2 Overview of Debate activity in English speaking lesson at 28

Fast Track Program, ULIS, VNU 3.2.1 Debates in English speaking lesson 28

3.2.2 Debates in English speaking lesson at Fast Track 29

Program, ULIS, VNU 3.2.2.1 Objectives 29

3.2.2.2 Procedure 29

3.2.2.3 Assessment criteria 30

4 Studies on argument qualities in language learning activities 31

5 Summary of the chapter 31

Chapter 2: Methodology 32

1 The participants 32

2 Research question 32

3 Research design 33

3.1 Research methods 33

3.1.1 Observation 33

8

3.1.2 Interview 34

3.1.3 Survey 34

3.2 Data collection instruments 35

3.2.1 Observation sheet 35

3.2.2 Semi-structured interview protocol 35

3.2.3 Questionnaire 36

3.3 Data collection procedures 37

3.4 Data analysis methods 38

3.5 Data analysis procedures 39

4 Summary of the chapter 40

Chapter 3 Findings and discussions 41

1 Data analysis 41

1.1 Statistics of committed fallacies 41

1.1.1 Slippery slope 43

1.1.2 False analogy 44

1.1.3 False dilemma 45

1.1.4 Straw man 46

1.1.5 Bandwagon 47

1.1.6 False cause 48

1.1.7 Begging the question 49

1.1.8 Argument from ignorance 49

1.1.9 Irrelevant conclusion 50

1.1.10 Equivocation 51

1.1.11 Denying the antecedent 51

1.2 Fallacies’ influence on students’ debate performance and 52

the debates 1.3 Students’ knowledge about logical fallacies 54

9

2 Discussion and summary of data analysis findings 57

3 Summary of the chapter 58

PART 3 CONCLUSION 59

1 Conclusion and implications 59

2 Limitations 60

3 Suggestions for further studies 60

REFERENCES 62

APPENDICES 66

APPENDIX 1 66

APPENDIX 2 67

APPENDIX 3 68

APPENDIX 4 76

APPENDIX 5 132

10

PART A: INTRODUCTION

This initial part outlines issues leading to the carrying out of the whole study, states its aims and objectives, significance and scope and ends with the organization of the paper for the readers to be orientated

1 Statement of problem and rationale for the study

Critical thinking has been considered an indispensible tool for all citizens

of the 21st century In his book, ―Thought and Knowledge: An Introduction to

Critical Thinking‖, Halpern (2013) listed three reasons for its dominant

importance Firstly, there has been constant changes at workplace with the new demand for the ―knowledge worker‖ or the ―symbol analyst‖, a term used by the United States secretary to describe workers who are able to ―carry out multistep operations, manipulate abstract and complex symbols and ideas, acquire new information efficiently, and remain flexible enough to recognize the need for continuing change and for new paradigms for lifelong learning‖ Secondly, in the age of information, the world is overwhelmed with the amount of information available The author quoted a statistic by University of California in 2001 to elaborate on this: ―The world’s total yearly production of print, film, optical, and magnetic content would require roughly 1.5 billion gigabytes of storage This is the equivalent of 250 megabytes per person for every man, woman and child on earth‖ The sheer magnitude of information has raised the requirements of people’s having the ability to interpret, select, evaluate, learn and apply it Thirdly, the present generation of people needs critical thinking in order to make sound decisions towards issues which will affect the whole population of the world in the future On the realization of critical thinking’s significance, education has put the

skill in the centers of its activities

11

The last decades have witnessed radical changes in the practices of learning and teaching in Vietnam Following the international trend, education no longer focuses only on knowledge provision; its reforms have put great emphasis

on developing integral life skills for students such as problem-solving, making, self-study, self-evaluation and critical thinking skills In accordance with Article 5, Education Law 2005 of Vietnam, active, conscious, creative and independent thinking should be encouraged among learners; teaching, therefore, is required to create an environment in which self-regulated learning is promoted and learning itself is joyful for students (Vietnam National Assembly, 2006, as cited in Nguyen, 2015, p 4) Critical thinking skills have been perceived as part of the national philosophy of Vietnam’s education (Helmke and Vo, 1999) That is the reason why it has been the focal point of pedagogical activities at schools of various levels including University of Languages and International Studies,

decision-Vietnam National University, Hanoi (ULIS, VNU)

Building and assessing arguments is a crucial component of critical thinking whereas possessing profound understanding about logical fallacies is of

immense importance when it comes to argument construction and evaluation

Although ―logical fallacies‖ has been a familiar term in the academic world worldwide, in Vietnam, it still remains a fairly novel concept In ULIS, VNU, the only research paper on this topic was written eight years ago, concentrating on logical errors in writing There is an apparent lack of studies on the concept, especially in oral activities All these condition, henceforth, offered a chance for a

research on “Fallacies made by second-year students of Fast Track Program,

ULIS, VNU in the Debate activity” to be conducted

2 Aims and objectives

12

This study is aimed to explore the fallacies that second-year students of Fast Track Program, Faculty of English Language Teacher Education, ULIS, VNU commit during the Debate activity Specifically, first, students’ fallacies made by the students as well as their impacts on students’ performance and the debates are carefully identified and analyzed After that the extent to which students know

about logical fallacies are looked into

In brief, the research purports to address the following questions:

1 What are the fallacies made by second-year students of Fast Track Program, ULIS, VNU in the Debate activity?

2 How do the committed fallacies influence the students’ performance in the Debate and the debates in general, as perceived by the teachers?

3 To what extent do second-year students of Fast Track Program, ULIS, VNU know about logical fallacies?

3 Significance of the study

Once completed, this research is expected to serve as one of the initial studies on logical fallacies in ULIS, VNU It is expected that its results could (1) inform teachers and curriculum designers of students’ current knowledge about logical fallacies along with the logical mistakes they make during the Debate activity, (2) help students be aware of the mistakes and actively improve them and (3) for the larger scale effect, raise the awareness of the importance of teaching and learning about logical fallacies in ULIS, VNU

4 Scope of the study

This study is confined to Debate activity conducted by second-year students

of Fast Track Program, ULIS, VNU, investigating logical fallacies committed by

the debaters In other words, within the scope of this graduation paper, no other learning activities or projects involving reasoning are studied due to the limitation

13

of time The Debate activity is chosen because it is an outstanding one among the activities Furthermore, only logical fallacies are concentrated on, the remaining aspects deciding the success of debaters such as English proficiency, non-verbal language and debate manner are excluded

The population includes 61 students from two groups in English Language Teacher Education and one group in English Translation and Interpreting; all belong to the Fast Track Program The plain reason for the selection of the population is that Debate activity is a unique project developed for second-year Fast Track students Other students in the Mainstream program conduct an activity with the same name; nevertheless, the format is totally different

5 Organization

The research consists of three major parts which are Introduction (Part A), Development (Part B) and Conclusion (Part C) Development, the most pivotal section, is divided into three chapters:

Chapter 1 presents Literature Review It offers an overview of most updated and fundamental theories on critical thinking, arguments, logical fallacies, oral debate activity and also refers to other researches of the same area

Chapter 2 provides Methodology To be specific, sampling methods, data collection and analysis instruments and procedures are discussed in detail

Chapter 3 shows findings and discussions The three study questions are dealt with in this section

14

PART B: DEVELOPMENT CHAPTER 1 LITERATURE REVIEW

This chapter serves as an attempt to found the theoretical background for the study The key concepts surrounding logical fallacies as well as related studies will be reviewed

1 Critical thinking and arguments

1.1 Critical thinking in education

Thinking is humans’ natural process, but when left to itself, it is often

―biased, distorted, partial, uninformed or down-right prejudiced‖; excellence in thought or critical thinking, therefore, has to be systematically cultivated (Paul and Elder, 2007) The origin of critical thinking dates back to 2,500 years ago, being associated with the teaching practices of Socrates, who believed that sound knowledge and insights could not be guaranteed by a person’ power or high status, and that many theories and common beliefs exist with inconcrete evidence and irrational beliefs lurked under He established the significance of thorough investigation into a concept before putting faith into it, laying foundation for the critical thinking paradigm (Paul, R., Elder, L., & Bartell, T., 1997) Over the past centuries, the role of critical thoughts has been constantly promoted and greatly extended in various domains of human life

In view of literature, a considerable number of critical thinking definitions have been proposed Norris (1985) suggested that critical thinking is generally about making reasonable decisions on what to or not to believe Chance (1986, as cited in Fahim, Miri & Najafi, 2014) defined critical thinking as ―the ability to analyze facts, generate and organize ideas, defend opinions, make comparisons, draw inferences, evaluate arguments and solve problems‖ Meanwhile, another

15

definition is posited by Scriven and Paul (1987, as cited in ―Defining Critical Thinking‖, n.d.) at the eighth Annual International Conference on Critical Thinking and Education Reform, describing critical thinking as ―the intellectually disciplined process of actively and skillfully conceptualizing, applying, analyzing, synthesizing, and/or evaluating information gathered from, or generated

by, observation, experience, reflection, reasoning, or communication, as a guide to belief and action.‖

Compared to the two definitions by Norris (1985) and Chance (1986), this statement by Scriven and Paul (1987) is much more elaborate and comprehensive, covering all the points presented by the previous two scholars In short, critical thinking is an active, practice-required thinking process employing distinctive cognitive skills so as to seek truth and make well-reasoned judgments

As a saying goes ―To learn is to think To think poorly is to learn poorly

To think well is to learn well‖, critical thinking plays a very vital role in learning

in particular and in education in general Critical thinking ability helps students assess and construct their own arguments with the use of logic reasoning and sufficient evidence in an objective manner, alleged Braithwaite (2006, p.10) In other words, critical thinking fosters argumentation skill, the fundamental component of academic studies; accordingly, a critical learner stands a better chance to possess excellent academic performance This is supported by Tsai, Chen, Chang & Chang (2013) who discovered in a study conducted with science classes that students with good critical thinking could gain better understanding of the scientific processes Regarding language learners, according to Shirkhani & Fahim (2011), critical thinking skills are of immense importance to the improvements of students’ writing ability, language proficiency, oral communication ability and critical ideas production Sharing the same view, Van Tassel-Baska, Bracken, Feng, & Brown (2009) stated that critical thinking helps to

16

increase reading comprehension and reading assessment scores in reading classes Outside of the classrooms, critical thinking skills allow students to deal effectively with social and practical issues (Shakirova, 2007, p 42) As a result, that all educational sectors should cater for the development of critical thinking among students has been greatly emphasized

Argument identification, construction and evaluation are the most fundamental part of critical thinking In the following section, the definitions, elements, types and qualities of arguments will be carefully discussed

1.2 Arguments

1.2.1 Definition

Terminologically, arguments have been defined in a variety of ways As Walton (1990) put it, an argument is ―a social and verbal means‖ in attempt of settling a conflict or difference existing between two or more parties, involving a claim raised by at least one of the parties It can be seen that written arguments are excluded from this definition, which undermines its value Ten years later, the definition by Johnson and Blair (2000) seemed to overcome this shortcoming by identifying arguments as texts or discourses, naming it ―the distillate of the practice of argumentation‖ Although both definitions have their own merits, figuring out important features of arguments, none of them managed to point out specific elements of the concept Copi and Cohen (1990, p 6, as cited in Pinto, 2001) made a closer approach to argument element identification by offering a more detailed definition, attaching arguments to ―a group of propositions of which one is claimed to follow from the others, which are regarded as providing support

or grounds for the truth of that one‖ However, the term ―propositions‖ which, as explained by the Oxford online dictionary, only refers to ―a statement that expresses a concept that can be true or false‖ is still confusing It is Hardegree (1999) that successfully mentioned ―premises‖ and ―conclusion‖, clarifying that

1.2.2 Elements of an argument

Based on the definition by Hardegree (1999), an argument at first consists

of various statements, and when further analyzed, it has two sub-parts: premises and conclusion, as widely accepted

Firstly, it is essential that the definition of statements be noted As claimed

by Hardegree (1999), ―a statement is a declarative sentence, which is to say a sentence that is capable of being true or false‖ To put it in another way, other sentence types, namely interrogative, imperative, and exclamatory ones cannot make up an argument since they are not capable of being true of false On the one hand, the following are examples of statements

Don’t get drunk while driving again

What a scary ghost!

To say that statements are capable of being true or false does not necessarily mean that the truth of the statements is known for sure in all cases; the sentence of ―Ghosts exist‖ is an instance

18

Secondly, an argument is built on two sub-components: premises and conclusion Premises are statements formulating the basis of an argument, on which the conclusion could be drawn (Vu, 2013) There can be one or more premises in an argument whereas the number of conclusion is limited to one only, asserted Jones (2001) An example of premises and conclusion is presented as follows:

Premise 1: English is important for students’ future career Premise 2: Students should learn anything that is important for their future career

Conclusion: Students should learn English

In fact, ―the structure of an argument is often incomplete in the sense that some or even all of its premises are hidden, or even the conclusion is implied‖ (Vu, 2013) One instance with missing premise is the argument ―Smoking causes health problem Therefore, we should not smoke‖

Premise 1: Smoking causes health problems Premise 2 (hidden): We should not do anything that causes health problems

Conclusion: We should not smoke

In another context, the conclusion is assumed: ―The deadline for the progress report is tomorrow We could not miss the deadline.‖

Premise 1: The deadline for the progress report is tomorrow Premise 2: We could not miss the deadline

Conclusion (hidden): We could not “miss” tomorrow

Or We must finish the progress report before tomorrow

19

Premises are hidden when they are widely known, explicit or can be inferred from the available context without difficulties, whereas the lack of the conclusion happens when it is believed to an undoubted result of the premises (Swoyer, 2002)

1.2.3 Types of arguments

The categorization of arguments has a long history In 350 BC, Aristotle, the ancient Greek logician and philosophist, in his ―On Sophistical Refutations‖ (as cited in Walton, 1998, p 11) classified arguments into four types including didactic, dialectical, examination-arguments and contentious arguments

Didactic arguments are those which reason from the principles appropriate to each branch of learning and not from the opinions of the answerer (for he who is learning must take things on trust) Dialectical arguments are those which, starting from generally accepted opinions, reason

to establish a contradiction Examination-arguments are those which are based

on opinions held by the answerer and necessarily known to one who claims knowledge of the subject involved (in what manner, has been describe elsewhere) Contentious arguments are those which reason or seem to reason from opinion which appear to be, but are not really, generally accepted According to Walton (1998, p 11), the fifth type called descriptive arguments was added later by Aristotle: ―Descriptive arguments start from premises that are first principles of a science‖ Though this way of classification is not popular with modern logistics, it laid the pivotal foundation for later ones

Modern scholars generally agree on the division of arguments into two kinds: deductive and inductive arguments Vu (2013) proposed a very simple definition of both, asserting that ―deductive argument starts with premises which are general to arrive at a conclusion about a specific case; whereas, inductive argument goes otherwise by putting forward specific cases and make some generalizations in its conclusion‖ Starkey (2004) shared the same perspective and added that the foundations of the former are rules, laws, principles and

20

generalization; meanwhile, those of the latter are observations and experiences To elaborate on the definitions, examples of deductive and inductive arguments are given below

Conclusion (general): All men need oxygen to be alive

In deductive arguments, the truth of the premises guarantees the truth of the conclusion, as shown clearly in the above example; however, in inductive arguments, that the premises are all true does not make it certain that the conclusion is also true (Copi, 1969 & Vu, 2013) Consequently, this, as discussed

by Vu (2013), causes inductive arguments to be closely associated with

overgeneralization and stereotyping, which adversely affect their persuasiveness

1.2.4 Qualities of valid, strong, good and sound arguments

An argument can be labeled ―valid‖, ―strong‖, ―good‖ or ―sound‖ based on certain conditions that it satisfies

As for Epstein (2006), ―an argument is valid if there is no possible way for its premises to be true and its conclusion false (at the same time)‖ In other words, supposed that the premises were true, the conclusion would have to be always true

in all cases to make the argument valid; any exception will cause the opposite In the case that the argument is invalid, if the likelihood that the conclusion is true is high, then the argument is strong; if the reverse happens, the argument is weak (Epstein, 2006 & Vu, 2013) Both valid arguments and invalid but strong ones are

21

considered good arguments (Vu, 2013) An argument is sound when and only when it is valid, and its premises are ―actually true‖ (Validity and Soundness, n.d.)

2 Logical fallacies in arguments

The soundness of an argument can be greatly devastated by the existence of logical fallacies; as a result, it is most important to gain an insight into logical

fallacies in order to avoid them

2.1 Definition

Logical fallacy has been defined in varying terminology by different scholars One of the earliest was by Aristotle (350 BC), saying that

That some reasonings are genuine, while others seem to be so but are not

is evident This happens with arguments, as also elsewhere, through a certain likeness between the genuine and the sham… [B]oth reasoning and refutation are sometimes genuine, sometimes not, though inexperience may make them appear so

Even though this definition is to some extent indirect and lengthy, it is the basis for recent scholars to give more concise definitions Copi (1961, p 52, as

cited in Fallacies, 2015) described a fallacy as ―a form of argument that seems to

be correct but which proves, upon examination, not to be so‖, which is one of the best summaries of Aristotle’s

2.2 Classifications

―Fallacies‖ (2015), a publication by Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, gave a very brief but comprehensive overview of the development in fallacy categorization As stated, the original list of fallacies was by Aristotle (350 BC), consisting of thirteen types of logical fallacies which fall into two groups: language-dependent (equivocation, amphiboly, combination of words, division of

22

words, accent and form of expression) and language-independent (accident, secundum quid, consequent, non-cause, begging the question, ignoratio elenchi and many questions) All subsequent studies of fallacies by various scholars such as Bacon (1620), Arnauld and Nicole (1662), Locke (1690) and Whately (1862) have been dependent on this first foundation Among the modern scholars, Copi (1961) proves to be the most successful in classifying fallacies by inheriting previous works Copi’s classification first placed fallacies into formal and informal ones Formal fallacies are invalid arguments, but ―bear a superficial resemblance‖ to the forms of valid ones, including affirming the consequent, denying the antecedent, the fallacy of four terms, undistributed middle, and illicit major Informal fallacies, instead, ―gain their allure some other way‖ Eighteen types of informal fallacies were further divided into the fallacies of relevance which are ―errors in reasoning into which we may fall because of carelessness and inattention to our subject matter‖ (Copi, 1961, p 53) and fallacies of ambiguity

Since Copi’s classification of informal fallacies is obviously detailed and clear, the list is going to be utilized in this research Besides eighteen types of informal fallacies by Copi, four more types of common informal fallacies, as listed

by Bennet (2012) in his book ―Logically Fallacious‖, will be also addressed in this section, considering the fact that those are the mistakes the subjects of this study made

(Abusive)

―It is committed when instead of trying to disapprove the truth of what is asserted, one attacks the man who

suggests that lowering taxes will be a good idea this is coming from a woman who

1969, p 55)

“Salesman: This car

gets better than average gas mileage and is one of the most reliable cars according

to Consumer Reports

Will: I doubt it—you

obviously just want to sell me that car.‖ (Bennet, 2012)

1969, p 57)

―Although we have proven that the moon

is not made of spare ribs, we have not proven that its core cannot be filled with them; therefore, the moon’s core is filled with spare ribs.‖ (Bennet, 2012)

Argumentum ad ―It is committed when ―I really deserve an

―A‖ on this paper, professor Not only did I study during my grandmother’s funeral,

I also passed up the heart transplant surgery, even though that was the first matching donor in 3 years.‖ (Bennet, 2012)

arousing the feelings and enthusiasm of the multitude‖ (Copi,

1969, p 60)

―How could you not believe in virgin births? Roughly two billion people believe

in them, don’t you think you should reconsider your position?‖ (Bennet, 2012)

to a conclusion (authority is appealed

to for testimony in matters outside the

―My 5th grade teacher once told me that girls will go crazy for boys

if they learn how to dance Therefore, if you want to make the ladies go crazy for you, learn to dance.‖

Accident ―It consists in

applying a general rule

to a particular case whose accidental circumstances render the rule inapplicable‖

(Copi, 1969, p 63)

―The Bible clearly says, ―thou shall not bear false witness‖, therefore, as a Christian, you better answer the door and tell our drunk neighbor with the shotgun, that his wife, whom he is looking to kill, is hiding in our basement, otherwise you are defying God himself!‖ (Bennet, 2012)

64)

―My father smoked four packs of cigarettes a day since age fourteen and lived until age sixty-nine Therefore, smoking really can’t

be that bad for you.‖

26

(Bennet, 2012)

False cause ―It is argument that

incorrectly attempts to establish a causal connection‖ (Copi,

1969, p 64)

―She worked hard and prayed God to help her Today she did the test well, so God blessed her.‖ (Bennet, 2012)

Petitio Principii

(Begging the

question)

―It is an attempt to establish the truth of a proposition one often casts about for the acceptable premises from which the proposition in question can be

Complex

question

―It is committed when the plurality of questions is detected and a single answer is demanded or returned

to a complex question which consists of several questions

―How many times per day do you beat your wife?‖ (Bennet, 2012)

27

rolled into one‖ (Copi,

1969, p 66)

Ignoratio Elenchi (Irrelevant conclusion)

―It is committed when

supposedly intended

to establish a particular conclusion

Argumentum ad baculum

coercion, or even a threat of force is used

in place of a reason in

an attempt to justify a conclusion.‖ (Bennet, 2012)

―Melvin: Boss, why

Informal

fallacies

of

Equivocation ―Equivocation occurs

when a key word is used with two or more

―It is said that we have

a good understanding

28

the same argument‖

(Copi, 1969, p 74)

universe Therefore,

we know exactly how

it began and exactly when‖ (Bennet, 2012)

Amphiboly ―It occurs in arguing

from premises whose formulation are ambiguous because of their grammatical construction‖ (Copi,

1969, p 75)

―No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless

on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war

or public danger‖ (Bennet, 2012)

Accent ―It is a form of fallacy

through shifting meaning In this case, the meaning is changed by altering which parts of a

29

―Yes, it’s possible to imagine him doing that.‖ This looks like agreement

If however, the second person stresses the word imagine, then this appearance vanishes; ―Yes, it’s possible to imagine him doing that.‖ This now sounds like a pointed comment meaning that though it may just about be possible to imagine him doing that, there’s

no way that he would actually do it‖ (Bennet, 2012)

Composition ―Inferring that

something is true of the whole from the fact that it is true of some part of the

―Your brain is made

of molecules Molecules

consciousness

30

whole.‖ (Bennet, 2012)

Therefore, your brain cannot be the source

of consciousness‖(Benne

t, 2012)

Division ―Inferring that

something is true of one or more of the parts from the fact that

it is true of the whole ― (Bennet, 2012)

―I heard that the Catholic Church was involved in a sex scandal cover-

up Therefore, my 102 year-old Catholic

frequently attends Church, is guilty as well!‖ (Bennet, 2012)

Slippery slope ―When a relatively

insignificant first event is suggested to lead to a more significant event, which in turn leads to

a more significant event, and so on, until some ultimate, significant event is reached, where the connection of each

―We cannot unlock our child from the closet because if we

do, she will want to roam the house If we let her roam the house, she will want to roam the neighborhood If she roams the neighborhood, she will get picked up by a stranger in a van, who

31

event is not only unwarranted, but with each step it becomes more and more improbable Many events are usually present in this fallacy, but only two are actually required usually connected by

―the next thing you know ‖.‖ (Bennet, 2012)

will sell her in a sex slavery ring in some other

country Therefore,

we should keep her locked up in the closet‖ (Bennet, 2012)

False analogy ―When an analogy is

used to prove or disprove an argument, but the analogy is too dissimilar to be effective, that is, it is unlike the argument more than it is like the argument.‖ (Bennet,

2012)

―Not believing in the literal resurrection of Jesus because the Bible has errors and contradictions, is like denying that the Titanic sank because eye-witnesses did not agree if the ship broke

in half before or after

32

position or argument with a distorted, exaggerated, or misrepresented

version of the position

of the argument.‖

(Bennet, 2012)

Christian God?

Mike: I don’t believe

in any gods, including the Christian one

Zebedee: So you think that we are here by accident, and all this design in nature is pure chance, and the universe just created itself?

Mike: You got all that from me stating that I just don’t believe in any gods?‖ (Bennet, 2012)

33

False dilemma ―When only two

choices are presented yet more exist, or a spectrum of possible choices exists between two extremes False dilemmas are usually characterized by

―either this or that‖

language, but can also

be characterized by

choices Another variety is the false trilemma, which is when three choices are presented when more exist.‖ (Bennet, 2012)

―You are either with God, or against him‖ (Bennet, 2012)

Table 1: Types of Informal Fallacies

However, regarding formal fallacies, Epstein (2006) had a more systematic list, which was adapted by Vu (2013) in the table below

Formal fallacy type Similar type of valid or

strong argument

Examples of Fallacies

Affirming the consequent Direct way of reasoning If she stays up late, she

will be tired in the morning She is tired this morning, therefore, she stayed up late last night

Denying the antecedent

If A, then B

not A

Therefore, not B

Indirect way of reasoning

If A, then B

not B Therefore, not A

If she stays up late, she will be tired in the morning She didn’t stay

up late last night; therefore, she is not tired this morning

Arguing backwards with

All S are P

All P are Q

Therefore, all S are Q

Some students in this class are from Singapore Some students from Singapore are bad students; therefore, some students in this class are bad students

Arguing backwards with

Almost all children under

12 years old love to see

Mr Bean Bill loves to see Mr Bean; therefore, Bill is under 12 years old

Reasoning in a chain

with almost all

Almost all S are P

Almost all P are Q

Therefore, almost all S

are Q

Almost all children under

12 years old love to see

Mr Bean Almost all children love to see Mr Bean love to see Minions; therefore, almost all children under

12 years old love to see Minions

Table 2: Types of Formal Fallacies

3 Oral debate activity in education and in English learning

3.1 Overview of general debates

3.1.1 Definitions

36

The history of debates began over 4,000 years in the Egyptians (2080 B.C.) while debates as a teaching tool dated back over 2,400 years to Protagorus in Athens (481-411 B.C.) (Kennedy, 2007) As Branham (1991) put it, ―debate is the process by which opinions are advanced, supported, disputed and defended‖; debates could be either formal or informal, oral or written This definition places the emphasis on the process of a debate; in the meanwhile, the definition raised by Freeley and Steinberg (2005, as cited in Kennedy, 2007) draws attention to its result:

Debate refers to the process of considering multiple viewpoints and arriving at a judgment, and its application ranges from an individual using debate to make a decision in his or her own mind to an individual

or group using debate to convince others to agree with them

Snider and Schnurer (2006), however, directed the focus to the

structuredness of a debate, claiming that a debate should be ―equitably designed‖

to give equal opportunity of view presentation for both sides

3.1.2 Features of good debates

From Branham’s (1991) point of view, true debates consist in the qualities

of the arguments produced in the process of the debates A good debate is determined by the presence of four characteristics of arguments:

1 Development, through which arguments are advanced and supported;

2 Clash, through which arguments are properly disputed;

3 Extension, through which arguments are defended against refutation; and

4 Perspective, through which individual arguments are related to the larger question at hand (p 22)

In reality, not all debates contain all of these components; still, they are believed to be important to debating, thus encouraged (Snider and Schnurer, 2006)

3.1.3 The roles of sound arguments in debates

―Creating good arguments is the central part of any debate because arguments are the central tool of persuasion‖, emphasized (Snider and Schnurer,

37

2006) In order to win a debate, the debaters have to prepare good and even the better, sound arguments Since sound arguments can survive under scrutiny, it is convincing when presented, difficult to be attacked and refuted, easy to be defended Sound arguments found a concrete base for a final sound decision to be made as the decision is ―the sum of arguments‖ involved (Snider and Schnurer, 2006)

3.2 Overview of Debate activity in English speaking lesson at Fast

Track Program, ULIS, VNU

3.2.1 Debates in English speaking lesson

Debates have been widely utilized as an effective educational tool over a range of subject areas such as science, business and law; foreign language teaching and learning is not an exception According to Snider and Schnurer (2006), debates have proved to be ―an outstandingly productive exercise for language acquisition‖ and ―a valued technique for learning English‖ all over the globe The scholars offered a thorough explanation that such recognition given to debates comes from the fact that debates equip language learners with necessary skills for their life in a different culture To be specific, ―debates put students in situations where they will have to ―think‖ in a different language‖ (p 208) Expression and structure memorization only help students deal with simple types

of communication; Living in a different culture entails ―problem solving and critical processes that require the manipulation of logical concepts‖, which is similar to the way debates ask students to critically examine their own and others’ arguments

Depending on the identified level of students, debate activity in English speaking class can be held in a variety of formats One-on-one short debates are suitable for learners with low proficiency while for students with high language competence, team debates are more helpful