Ad Hominem Attack

"Ad hominem" is Latin for "to the person." An ad hominem attack goes after the person making the argument instead of the argument itself. Keep personalities out of the issue and instead focus on the controversial topic.

Fallacy: It's not surprising Jake from Jake's Roadhouse opposes food trucks since Jake is a selfish crook.

Better: It's not surprising restaurant owners oppose food trucks, but they should not be allowed to prevent fair competition.

Appeal to Ignorance

An appeal to ignorance cites a lack of evidence as if it were evidence. Support your argument with actual facts, statistics, examples, and so on.

Fallacy: No one has any idea whether food trucks would cause a problem in Waterford, so we can't outlaw them.

Better: Upper Forks, a city about the size of Waterford, passed a balanced food-truck ordinance, and five years later, their brick-and-mortar restaurants are thriving due to the new foodie culture.

Bandwagon

Long ago, people promoting a specific cause would put a band on a wagon and march through town with it, handing out pamphlets urging people to join the cause. The modern bandwagon fallacy is telling people they should do or believe something because everyone else is. Remember, a mob is often wrong. Instead, use careful logic and truthful examples to show why your position is strong.

Fallacy: All of our neighbor cities allow food trucks, so we should also.

Better: We can study the food truck ordinances and operations in our neighbor cities to learn what works and what doesn't before we create our own law.

Broad Generalization

A broad generalization occurs when one limited case is taken to represent all cases everywhere. Instead, present a complete picture of the situation.

Fallacy: Every student at my lunch table would rather eat from a food truck than have another cafeteria meal, so all of Waterford is crying out for this change.

Better: A recent survey by the Waterford Examiner showed that 73 percent of citizens polled indicated a desire to have food trucks available within the city.

Circular Reasoning

Circular reasoning starts and ends in the same place. The givens of the argument are the same as the conclusions. Instead, your argument should start with givens that even opponents would agree with and should use logic and evidence to convince them of your conclusion.

Fallacy: The Nation Food Truck Association, the leading advocate for unrestricted mobile food service vending, recommends that food trucks have no restrictions in terms of operation.

Better: A recent study by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration outlined five key components for successful food-truck regulation.

Genetic Fallacy

The genetic fallacy argues that the origin of something dictates its current reality. Just because Thursday began as "Thor's Day" doesn't mean lightning storms are more common then. Deal with the current reality of the issue.

Fallacy: We all know what food-trucks are: claptrap hotdog carts spreading indigestion and obesity one student at a time.

Better: Though historically food trucks have sold only junk food at high prices, today's food trucks often offer diverse, healthy fare prepared by chefs—at competitive prices.

Half-Truth

A half-truth knowingly presents only one side of an issue with two or more sides. Be sure to provide a complete picture. If you ignore information that does not support your view, you weaken your position by opening yourself up to attack.

Fallacy: Consumers win when they have more dining options, so we should allow food trucks into the city.

Better: Consumers win when they have more dining options, but providers of dining options must have a fair marketplace in which to compete for consumers. That's why careful regulation of food trucks is key.

Jumping to Conclusions

Avoid making conclusions that are not supported by logic and strong evidence. Help readers follow each step of your argument along the way.

Fallacy: Gas prices are rising, so food trucks won't create any competition for restaurants.

Better: Rising gas prices, inclement weather, vehicle maintenance, and the struggle to stock and run a fully-functioning kitchen in a tight space make food-truck operation a different challenge from restaurant operation.

Oversimplification

Oversimplification renders a complex situation as if it were simple. Embrace complexity as you make your argument.

Fallacy: A vote against food trucks is a vote against free enterprise. It's a vote against America.

Better: A vote to ban food trucks outright would limit competition and thereby reduce food options and raise prices.

Slanted Language

Slanted language uses highly positive or highly negative terms in order to make disagreement impossible. Show your commitment to your position, but use fair language when representing it and opposition to it.

Fallacy: Greedy restaurant owners are trying to rig the marketplace so that they can get rich off us while still cooking the same horrible food.

Better: Restaurant owners understandably want to prevent unfair competition, but fair competition will only push them to improve their offerings and prices.

Straw Man

Medieval knights used to practice by slashing at a scarecrow that represented their foes. In an argument, a straw man is an absurd position that opponents don't actually hold, set up only so that the writer can easily strike it down. Instead, fairly represent the opposing position before defeating it.

Fallacy: People who want to ban food trucks want to keep everybody eating fast food and paying high prices.

Better: People who want to ban food trucks fear unfair competition, so they should help craft legislation that ensures a level playing field.