fallacy of false division and false composition

Question

Hello!

Could you guys please give me examples of fallacy of false division and false composition. I am still not able to grab my mind around it, so could y’all give me an example of both. Thanks!



Answer 1

Hi Emma,

Fallacy of division refers to an unfounded assumption that a characteristic of some thing must also be true for its parts. An example would be: 1) The luxury brand is known for its high prices, 2) This shirt is from this luxury brand, 3) This shirt must be expensive. While the luxury brand is indeed known to have expensive items, this individual shirt is not necessary guaranteed to be expensive. A more advanced example would be: 1) The economy in Brazil is growing very fast, 2) We are going to launch a new business in Brazil, 3) Our new business will also grow very fast.

Fallacy of composition is the reverse. It is assuming that a characteristic that is true for something is also true for the whole. An example would be: 1) This shirt is expensive, 2) This store sells this shirt, 3) The store sells expensive things. We cannot assume based on the single example of the one expensive shirt that the entire store sells expensive things. A more advanced would be: 1) Great Expectations is a great novel by Charles Dickens, 2) Dickens has at least a dozen well known works, 3) The rest of his books should be equally as great.

Hope this helps!

Answer 2

Hi Emma!

Fallacy of division is where the assumption of the whole is applied to the parts. Kind of like over generalization. For example: The most popular sport in Brazil is soccer, Paolo is from Brazil, therefore Paolo's favorite sport is soccer. Or the US is a rich country, therefore everyone in the US must be rich.

Fallacy of composition is where you attribute the traits of the part and assume it to the whole. For example: If I leave earlier in the morning, I'll beat rush our traffic. Therefore, if everyone else leaves early in the morning, they'll also beat rush hour traffic.

Essentially they are the inverse of each other, one generalizes the individual other generalizes the whole.