Authorial fallacies

Most writing require the writer to make an argument—that is, to present reasons for a particular claim or interpretation the writer is putting forward. You may have wondered what it means for an argument to be strong. Each argument you make is composed of premises (this is a term for statements that express one's reasons or evidence) that are arranged in the right way to support your conclusion (the main claim or interpretation you are offering). One can make one's arguments stronger by

1. using good premises (ones you have good reason to believe are both true and relevant to the issue at hand),
2. making sure your premises provide good support for your conclusion (and not some other conclusion, or no conclusion at all),
3. checking that you have addressed the most important or relevant aspects of the issue (that is, that your premises and conclusion focus on what is really important to the issue), and
4. not making claims that are so strong or sweeping that you can't really support them.

Some examples below describe some ways in which arguments often fail to do the things listed above; these failings are called fallacies.
It is particularly easy to slip up and commit a fallacy when you have strong feelings about your topic—if a conclusion seems obvious to you, you're more likely to just assume that it is true and to be careless with your evidence. 
The purpose of this writing, though, is not to argue for any particular position on any of these issues; rather, it is to illustrate weak reasoning and writer's fallacies, which can happen in pretty much any kind of argument and be detrimental to one's reputation.

What are fallacies?

Fallacies are defects that weaken arguments.
It is important to realize two things about fallacies: first, fallacious arguments are very, very common and can be quite persuasive, at least to the casual reader or listener.
Second, it is sometimes hard to evaluate whether an argument is fallacious. An argument might be very weak, somewhat weak, somewhat strong, or very strong.

1) Appeal to pity

Definition: The appeal to pity takes place when an arguer tries to get people to accept a conclusion by making them feel sorry for someone.
Examples: "....the powers that be, came down hard on this poor and fragile writer, demanding that I use a hyphen-also called dash to those who aren't familiar-when using the term 6-pack. Now whether or not, the omission of a hyphen constitutes a telling off with numerous exclaimation marks and the word 'blardee' which one can safely interpret as 'bloody', its hard to say.".
The information the arguer has given might feel relevant and might even get the audience to consider the conclusion—but the information isn't logically relevant, and so the argument is fallacious.         
Objective: Make sure that you are simply trying to get your audience to agree with you by making them feel sorry.

2) Ad hominem and tu quoque

Definitions: The ad hominem ("against the person") and tu quoque ("you, too!") fallacies focus our attention on people rather than on arguments or evidence. In both of these arguments, the conclusion is usually "You shouldn't believe So-and-So's argument." The reason for not believing So-and-So is that So-and-So is either a bad person (ad hominem) or a tyrant. In an ad hominem argument, the arguer attacks his or her opponent instead of the opponent's point.
Examples: "Displaying the autocratic leadership, the powers that be immediately shut Lee Yum Hwa down when he jumped in to protect this author's creative independence." The arguer has characterized the 'merely concerned' member of the team so ungenerously, it has nothing to do with the 'correcting the wrong' act he so passionately displayed. While using a copious number of exclamation mark can be described as 'overzealous' but using them as evidence of autocracy is fallacious.
Objective: Attacking opponents' personal character instead of their reasoning.

While this writer agrees that it is all in the name of fun and what is life if we cannot accept self-effacing humor. This serves merely as a reminder the casual readers to take our articles here lightly, a caution to the writers that your words is your sword and/or a disclaimer that no Yum Wa is harmed in the process. Hwa!

The amount of facts Writer Teo injects in his articles.