This document discusses argumentation as a type of discourse that appeals to the reader's intellect through facts, statistics, quotes, and logical reasoning to support its contentions. It also outlines several common fallacies to avoid in argumentation, including post hoc ergo propter hoc, which assumes causation without evidence; non sequitur, where a conclusion does not follow from what came before; overgeneralization, making broad claims without sufficient data; and ad hominem arguments, which attack the person rather than the issue being discussed.

1. ◎Appeals to the reader’s intellect.
◎Presents its contentions through facts,
statistics, and quotes
◎Supported by logical reasoning and
pieces of evidence
Types of Discourse:
ARGUMENTATION

2. Fallacies:
◎“post hoc ergo
propter hoc”
 “after this, therefore
because of this”
 Associated with
superstitious beliefs
◎Non sequitur
◎“it does not follow”
◎A conclusion or
comment unrelated to
a preceding one.

3. ◎Overgeneralization
◎Without sufficient
evidence, you draw a
conclusion about a
group.
◎Ad hominem
argument
◎“against the man”
◎The person is
attacked instead of the
actual issue.
Fallacies: