I used Ad populum appeal to indirect consequences!

This is amazing! This kind of Fallacy is very strong and useful in our life.

Here are my real life example. Today my friend desired to go the Indian stall to take dinner but I do not want because I want to take dinner at Cyberia. So I used this fallacy to persuade him.

The story is begin with this:

"Hey, we go to Indian stall and take our dinner, ok?" My friend said.

"What! Are you crazy?That cook is so unhygienic , he scratches his leg before cooking, uses his unclean hand to cook, after eating you will feel sick,people will start to think your dirty because you eat dirty food, you will feel not confident with yourself, when your morale is low,you will feel sad,your sadness will cause you to be unwanted, then you will become isolated always and live miserable forever!"I said.

After listen to my "persuasion", we went to cyberia and took our dinner but unfortunately the food there also no hygiene. The continuous unknown future consequences will make my friend aware about his future and thus he is persuaded by me. This fallacy is defined as Ad populum appeal to indirect consequences or called “slippery slope argument”

How To Go To The Old Town?

My friend, Calvin is tired and boring for eating the same food in MMU. He suggested us to go to Old Town Cafe nearby. So, we "recruit" our team members. One problem occured among us when we want to go to the Old Town Cafe. We do not know how to go!

Luckily, I got my friend Wei Ming who know how to go there.

He said after we reached the bus-stop of MMU, turn left and go straight until we see the T-junction where nearby got condominiums, turn right with go across the road then turn left again and we will reach Old Town Cafe.

Thanks to him, I can have my wonderful dinner today!

BCT: Wei Ming was used IMPLICIT KNOWLEDGE to teach us the direction to go Old Town.

We can see those everyday...

Everyday we can found advertisements, notices, reminders and others anywhere we are. For example television, website, board, newspaper and etc. But actually without awareness, we interpret the implicit conclusion or implicit premises. Here are some examples I found in MMU:-

You can see this everyday if you live in hostel. From above, the implicit conclusion is that we should lock our door when we going out. This is because (implicit premises) the thief will steal our belonging if we do not do so as the picture showed to us.

This is a picture I took in front of HB3. The picture implicitly conclude that the parking lot is only for disable people and thus normal people cannot parking on this lot(implicit premises).

Unknown Biography

1. What is the cat doing?

Description of what was happening just before:

The cat jumped on the table and gripped the chicken's residue.

Description of what just happens after:

The cat finished its delicious food and went away.

Description of what just happens as the picture was taken:

The cat looks like finding something.

2.An Orange

Description of what was happening just before:

The orange was in a plastic bag.

Description of what just happens after:
The orange was peeled and eaten by me! Haha!

Description of what just happens as the picture was taken:
The orange is put on the table.

3.What was the person doing?

Description of what was happening just before:
I threw the rubbish on the floor

Description of what just happens after:
I told him that I just made a joke and I took up the rubbish.

Description of what just happens as the picture was taken:
I blamed on him because he threw the dustbin on lane but actually is I trying to impute the responsibility to him.

4.Who is this pretty girl beside me?

Description of what was happening just before:
She was taught us in Critical Thinking tutorial.

Description of what just happens after:
We went to do our next thing after the photo taken.

Description of what just happens as the picture was taken:
Jessica who was my last CT tutor took the picture with me.

A Conversation with Sensei

Today after attended the japanese languages class, my friends and I went to Sirah's Cafe to take our breakfast.Fortuitously , we saw our Japanese lecturer - "sensei" Hanae Nakamura. Without hesitating, Calvin and I went to sit with her.
Below is our brief conversation:-

Calvin,I: Hi, sensei! Ohayougozaimasu!(Good morning, teacher)
Sensei:Ohayougozaimasu.
I: Heard that you are going back to Japan on October, is it ?
Sensei: Yes.
I: So sad to hear that, but sensei, may I know when will you come back to Malaysia again?
Sensei: Well, I think I won't come back to Malayisa temporary. I have to work at Japan after this.
I:Wow, what occupation will you work there ?
Sensei: Confidential ,haha.
I: Haha, it's ok but why you work at Malaysia for 1 year but then go back to Japan?
Sensei: I got my lecture's international license and have to work as lecturer for one year in oversea .
Calvin: Haha, before you come to Malaysia, how many countries have you been visited? Last time you told us that you went to France alone during 19 years old.It's amazing!
Sensei:Erm...Over 20 countries already at that time.
I: That is terrible, I haven't go to any foreign country since I have been borned. Why you have such ambition to go foreign countries for visit?
Sensei: That is normal for japanese people, I think all of the people in Japan love to travel.Many people that i knew in Japan like to travel!Do you know that , the air ticket in Japan is cheaper than the others country! Only RM 600 from Japan to Malaysia!
Calvin: Actually what course did you take during undergraduating
Sensei: Architecture engineering.
Calvin: Then all people in Japan take engineering?
Sensei: It's quite ok, no so much.

We took this picture when in Sirah's Cafe.













From above , hasty generalisation occur when sensei said"I think all of the people in Japan love to travel.Many people that i knew in Japan like to travel!" This is because the sample she took is too small compare to all population in Japan. She said so maybe she only knew the people who is like to travel. So, the perception is bias and not accurate to conclude that all the japanese people love to travel.Besides that, she support her conclusion by saying that"Do you know that , the air ticket in Japan is cheaper than the others country! This is consider as premise which is support the conclusion. In addition, she also use supporting argument to support the premise that is "Only RM 600 from Japan to Malaysia"

In addition, Calvin also did the same mistake. "Then all people in Japan take engineering?" he said.This is his conclusion after sensei said she took engineering. He is same as take 1 person's judgment conclude all others people judgment. This is very a weak conclusion and we should avoid such fallacy when we talking.

Downstairs Neighbour

It's common for us arise some conflicts when we live under one root. Once my lecturer said we have to do our BCT diary, immediately I think about him, my downstairs neighbour. The incident was happened last few weeks ago:-

My roommates and I went back to hostel room after dinner, then he came up and kept wondering outside our door but we ignored him. After he observed us for a while, he started to speak out with anger: "Which one of you, poured the water outside the windows?Do you know that the water will spread into my room and my books were wet because of that!"
My roommates and I stared at each others, then one of my roommate said:"Sorry but we don't know about that, we just reach our room only, maybe this is done by upstairs' neighbours?"
He silent for a while then said:" Next time don't hang the wet clothes on the awning, because the water will dripping into my room! "
In spark I replied him back:" I saw you hang your clothes even your undergarments on the awning! Think about yourself before saying others! My dear!"
After that, my neighbour walked back to his room miserably.


See! Even when Im doing this assignment, he did like this...So, what is your feeling?What do you think about the 1st floor's resident? Haha...How come if the water of undergarment drip onto 1st floor room....

From above obviously we can observe that the neighbour tried to persuade us for not hang the wet clothes on awning but in contrast he did the same thing. This is considered as a fallacy which is Tu Quoque(Look who's talking). This fallacy committed when an arguer rejects another person's argument or claim because that person fails to preactice what he preaches.
In this case, he did the same mistake as we did, so why should we follow his advice?

The logical pattern of these arguments is this:

1. Neighbour fails to follow his own advice.
2.Therefore, neighbour's claim should be rejected.