Face Value Fallacy In The Crucible

1316 Words6 Pages
Miller uses the character of Abby to enforce how one can use faulty logic to support incorrect accusations. There was obviously no legitimate reason to support her accusations, so Abby effectively used faulty logic to support her claims. Abby uses the face value fallacy when she is accused of lying by Mary Warren; Abby counters by saying "I have been hurt, Mr. Danforth; I have seen my blood runnin' out! I have been near murdered every day because I done my duty pointing out the Devil's people- and this is my reward? To be mistrusted, denied, questioned "(Miller 108) showing obvious disgust to the fact she was even being questioned. Her disgust is an example of the face value fallacy because her arguments were from a basis of her personal sacrifice…show more content…
This man is Danforth, he uses dangerous logic in many places to get an incorrect point across especially when there is no reasonable argument to make. For instance, when Giles was presenting a counterargument against Putnam's accusation about George Jacobs, Giles refuses to give the name of the man who gave him the information about Putnam. As a result Danforth uses a double bind fallacy to deflect his argument and force him into a decision he did not want to make: "Do you wish me to declare the court in full session her? Or will you give me a good reply?" (Miller 97) This is a prime example, because Danforth has no real argument to make as to why Giles should tell him (since they are not in court); so Danforth uses a double bind to force Giles to make a decision that only satisfies Danforth himself. Moreover, when Danforth was speaking of the crime of witchcraft he uses the fallacy of ignorance to deflect all the arguments that the defense presented: "But witchcraft is an (invisible crime)...Therefore who may possibly be witness to it? The witch and the victim. None other. Now we cannot hope the witch will accuse herself; granted? Therefore, we must rely on her victims and they do testify"(Miller 100) He uses this to show that no one knows if the crime actually happened besides the witch and victim, so in…show more content…
And also like Danforth and Abby, he uses this logic when there is no good argument to make. When thinking about Parris's use of fallacies, one must consider the point in the novel when Parris was deflecting Proctor's claims for the defense of his wife: "You are in all respects a Gospel Christian? (yes)... Such a christian that will not come to church but once in a month"(Miller 90) Parris uses no viable argument, but rather resorts to attacking the person the person being Proctor. The fact that he uses Proctor's church attendance as an argument, is very irrelevant to the case itself. One can easily perceive that Parris had to use this because he had no other argument to make. Additionally, Parris uses a faulty appeal to popularity and a double bind, in order to undermine the argument from the defense. Parris claimed that Francis Nurse's petition was a clear attack on the court on the grounds that, "All innocent and Christian people are happy for the courts in Salem! These people are gloomy for it."(Miller 94) He claims that just because some innocent people are happy for the courts then all must be, and for that reason he forces the defense into a double bind because they are forced to label themselves as either: happy for the court and innocent, or gloomy for the court and guilty, no in between. Parris uses
Open Document