Be a stronger thinker and decision-maker: avoid these 14 'logical fallacies'!

Today's fast-changing and uncertain world needs leaders to have sharp thinking, problem-solving and decision-making skills. However, research strongly indicates that generally leaders do not have such skills.

For example, a global survey in 2019 of business leaders by McKinsey found that fewer than half of respondents considered that decisions in their organisation are timely and 61% said at least half of the time spent making decisions is ineffective. Many complained of the slow pace of decision-making and of the uneven quality of decision-making outcomes.

Meanwhile, a similar Bain & Co survey found that companies that were most effective at decision-making and execution saw average shareholder returns nearly six percentage points higher than those of other firms.

Stop and find space to think!

Of course, robust decision-making in an organisation depends on a host of different factors. The crucial starting point, though, should always be for individuals to pause and find space and time to take 'conscious' control over their thinking rather than (as very often happens) ceding control to impulsive reactions or instinctive thinking, or simply following the view 'of the crowd' or avoiding the pain or hassle of engaging in any focused thinking!

Two crucial factors that support robust thinking are: a) defining and following a structured thinking and deliberation process and b) involving a suitable mix of people (in terms of experience, perspective, knowledge and thinking styles) to reach a decision.

Another crucial dimension, though, is getting decision-makers to carefully and proactively avoid various types of distorted or biased thinking.

Notable types (sources) of potential distortion which can apply in a decision-making situation are: individuals' cognitive biases (for example, our tendency to pay more attention to emotions than facts, our tendency to prefer the status quo, and our concern to avoid anything that threatens our ego); 'group; behavioural biases (for example, our tendency to conform to the norms and majority views of a wider social group); misrepresenting data or facts (for example, assuming trends today will continue as a straight line into the future); and - what I'd like to zero in on here - 'logical fallacies' (or sometimes called reasoning errors or rhetorical fallacies).

What are logical fallacies ?

Logical fallacies are arguments that seem valid 'on the surface' but are actually based on unsound or flawed reasoning. They are to be found just about anywhere you find people debating or discussing a topic. They are typically statements made by a person who has not taken the time to think through them clearly and logically. But sometimes they are statements made because the person does actually intend to make a flawed argument, usually in an attempt to sway others' opinions or undermine their opponent's argument.

Awareness of logical fallacies is important because we all spend a great deal of our lives interpreting and evaluating other people's spoken or written reasoning as a basis for making our choices and decisions. Equally, knowledge of such fallacies helps improve our own ability to persuade others that our ideas are worth listening to and following.

Meet some of the most common fallacies:

1. Ad hominem (personal attack)

An ad hominem fallacy is one that attempts to undermine or invalidate an opponent's position based on referring to a personal trait or fact about the opponent rather than focusing on the issue being discussed. (For example: "Kevin is a bad choice to be our new, local manager because he didn't grow up in this town").

2. False dichotomy

This involves offering a choice between two options that deliberately ignores or excludes other available possibilities. Often, these two options are extreme opposites of each other, failing to recognise that other, more reasonable options also exist. (For example: "If you don't support my decision, you were never really my friend").

3) Causal fallacy

This is a fallacy I come across quite regularly. It is where a relationship between two things is claimed or implied but which can't actually be proven. (For example: "Whenever, James - our manager - goes away on holiday, the team's sales go up. Therefore, I think James must be a bad influence on the team").

4) Appeal to authority

This is where a person points to an authority figure's expertise to support a claim despite that expertise being irrelevant or overstated. (For example: "If you want to be healthy, you need to stop drinking coffee. This is what our CEO does".)

5) Sunk cost fallacy

This quite common fallacy is where a person justifies his/her decision to continue a course of action by the amount of time or money they've already spent on it. (For example: "I'm not enjoying this book, but I bought it, so I have to finish reading it".)

6) Bandwagon fallacy

With this fallacy, the arguer claims that a certain action is the right thing to do simply because it is popular and liked by many people. (For example: "It's fine to wait until the last minute to draft that paper. Everyone does it!")

7) Slippery slope

This is where a person claims a specific chain of events will follow on from a starting point but with no supporting evidence to merit the claim. (For example: "If we agree to Jane changing her work start time to 10.30 from 9 am, then all of our employees will be wanting to do so and we'll end up with nobody at all being in the office on mornings!")

8) Circular argument

This is an argument that uses the same statement as both the premise and the conclusion. (For example: "France will be our easiest next market to enter because I think France is generally an easier market to enter").

9) Appeal to emotion

This is where a person attempts to sway the other person's opinion by provoking emotionally (For example: "I am sure Matt will support me in this matter .... because he's always been a loyal and reliable member of the team").

10. Straw Man

This involves misrepresenting or distorting someone's argument so that it appears weaker or less viable than it really is. (For example: a person campaigning for better road safety measures for pedestrians might say "cars are dangerous" and their opponent could then turn this into a 'straw man' by claiming that their opponent believes that cars should be banned.)

11. Appeal to ignorance

This is a claim that something must be true because it hasn't been proven false, or conversely, a claim that something must be false because it hasn't been proved true. (For example: "All our products are the best quality in our market because nobody has every proved that they're not").

12. Post-hoc fallacy

This is where a person claims or assumes that one event causes another event purely because the former happened before the second event.

13. Red herring

This fallacy involves trying to substantiate a claim or argument by pointing to something that has no real or actual relevance or bearing on the matter being discussed. (For example: "John thinks we need to stop using plastics in our products now, so that the Amazonian rainforest doesn't deteriorate any further").

14. Generalisation or equivocation

This is making a statement crafted in such a way to mislead or confuse other people by resorting to unwarranted stereotyping, generalisation or categorisation, or otherwise using vague or unclear phrasing. (For example: "I have a plan for next year's activity that accounts for every pound spent, whereas my opponent simply wants to throw money at 'special projects').

Be ready to spot fallacies and counter them!

The above is not an exhaustive list of all logical fallacies but it includes the more common ones that occur in conversations, discussions, in writing or in online communications.

At the end of the day, the best way to avoid making a logical fallacy is to familiarise yourself with these common examples and learn how to recognise them. Then, when you're hearing or seeing arguments being made by other people, consider carefully if any of the fallacies apply and be ready to question or counter-argue - of course, avoiding use of any fallacies yourself!

/ Written by Mike P. Owen