ONLY BINAY, ONLY BINAY (NOT) @philo1groupprojectvv - Tumblr Blog

Posts

This advertisement is another of example of an argumentum ad misericordiam (appeal to pity). Obviously Binay is using the death of his mother to breast cancer as an appeal to the audience, to make them feel pity for him and to vote for him. But why do you need our pity? Breast cancer is a sad thing yes, but for the sake of voting?

Bruh, just no. Really?

#binay2016 #eleksyon2016 #pilipinas2016

Excuse me ha? Hinding-hindi po ha, excuse me ha? Pera ho namin iyon. Baka ang iba. (Excuse me. I never do that. We use our own money. Maybe others do that.)

Jejomar Binay, when asked about corruption allegations

This is an example of a personal ad hominem. This fallacy attacks back by attacking the opponent, which is what Binay is doing. How are we suppose to trust this guy to be our president when all he does is attack people? I don’t think this guy can be trustworthy if he keeps doing this. Ugh, we’ll just see what happens won’t we?

#binay2016 #pilipinas2016 #eleksyon2016

“Ang importante po, ang magiging pangulo ay may kakayahang ipatupad yung kanyang ipinapangako, mayroong track record, may karanasan. Kung may karanasan naman, baka naman puros kapalpakan, ito ho si Jojo Binay, sa lawak ng karanasan, wala na pong makakapantay sa akin. Karanasan bilang nanungkulan sa executive department.”

(What’s important is that, the soon-to-be president has the ability to enforce what he has promised, has a track record, and has experience. If he has experience, it might be mostly errors, this is Jojo Binay, with a wide experience, no one can compare with me. Experience as someone who has served in the executive department.) [as if it makes sense lol]

In the Philippines, we have a popular idiom that goes as: “nagbubuhat ng sariling bangko” (lifting up one’s chair), which means that a person who’s committing it boasts about himself shamelessly. In this case, Binay is guilty of this. What’s he more guilty about is committing the sanctimony fallacy. It means that the arguer implies that his/her position has moral superiority over the opponent's position. It basically implies an “I’m better than you” attitude.

Apart from this, he is also guilty of poisoning the well. This is committed when one arguer attempts to bias the listener against his/her opponent, sometimes even before the argument begins. In this case, Binay has done it by stating “Kung may karanasan naman, baka naman puros kapalpakan” (If he has experience, it might be mostly errors), directed towards the other presidential candidates.

Humility is still the best way to get into a person’s heart. Don’t do this again, Binay.

#binay2016 #eleksyon2016 #pilipinas2016

This is an example of an personal ad hominem, and although this is not a direct attack towards Duterte, the very fact that Duterte is known to be a womanizer and Binay releases this statement...kinda suspicious...

The argumentum ad odium fallacy (appeal to spite) is also present here. Sigh, Binay. The argumentum ad odium fallacy is when someone tries to win favour by exploiting feelings of bitterness or spite for the opposing party. In this case, against Duterte.

Lastly, the moral high-ground fallacy is when you are insisting that your argument is correct because they align with your personal morals more than your opponent's argument does, and come one seriously? That just speaks for itself.

Stop throwing shade, man!

“Binay, who fought against dictatorship as a human rights lawyer during martial law, was also against the use of violence to correct the present administration’s blunders.”

Howdie, howdie! Binay back at it again with the fallacies. When will this ever end, oh Lord. Once again, he has committed the personal ad hominem fallacy in such a short statement by indirectly attacking both the Marcos regime and the present administration (which, up to date, is PNoy’s). This one sentence was effective in implying how flawed the aforementioned administrations were.

Apart from this, he has also committed the sanctimony fallacy, wherein he hails his own name and attempts to persuade people of how eligible he is through his own descriptions about himself.

Come on, man. Throwing shade is not cool.

#binay2016 #eleksyon2016 #pilipinas2016

Wow, so happy. That picture above looks really genuine, until a sentence ruined it all. “Sa pamumuno ni Jojo Binay, aangat ang buhay ng bawat Pilipino - pangako na nagawa ko na sa Makati.” (With Jojo Binay’s leadership, the life of every Filipino will be better - a promise that I have already done in Makati.)

This statement clearly commits the wishful thinking fallacy. This fallacy is the formation of beliefs and making decisions according to what might be pleasing to imagine instead of by appealing to evidence, rationality, or reality. Him claiming that each and every Filipino’s life will get better if he wins as president seems like a very idealistic vision. Instead of actually doing something, he mustn’t declare empty promises like these. Also, even though “he has already done it in Makati” (if he already has), it doesn’t mean that he has the unquestionable capability to make it happen in the whole country.

Apart from this, he also commits the sanctimony fallacy in this statement. He again makes his name a lot more fragrant by reiterating his “accomplishment” in Makati.

Also, he is also guilty of the cherry picking fallacy. It is the act of pointing to individual cases or data that seem to confirm a particular position, while ignoring a significant portion of related cases or data that may contradict that position. Basically, he made a bias for himself by stating just his good sides and ignoring his bad ones.

Lastly, he is guilty of the fallacy of composition. This fallacy arises when one infers that something is true of the whole from the fact that it is true of some part of the whole. For instance, he already claimed that he has made the Makati people’s lives better, therefore, he claims that he can do it for the whole Philippines.

Tl;dr: Know your candidates well, for they might make promises that will just turn into mere air after they get what they want from you.

#binay2016 #eleksyon2016 #pilipinas2016

This ad shows a testimony of a person who supposedly received help from Binay. Why use someone he helped to endorse him though? Hearing the testimony from Apple Valera, a cancer survivor who was supposedly helped by him, is a clear sign of the appeal to emotion fallacy. This logical fallacy is characterized by the manipulation of the recipient's emotions in order to win an argument.

Also, the sanctimony fallacy is being committed. This fallacy simply pertains to one’s self-righteousness. In this case, however, the claim came from the person in the video; though, it is for certain that Binay or his officials made her say that in the video.

The cherry picking fallacy is also evident in this ad. Cherry picking is basically just showing a part of the whole, in this case, what is desirable. This ad only showed the positive side of Binay and tried its best to make people ignore about his negative side.

This is why we shouldn’t be gullible in choosing whether to believe ads or not.

#binay2016 #eleksyon2016 #pilipinas2016

This ad above shows an old woman, holding up a sign saying “Serbisyu dili sa pag abuso” (Service, not abuse). The ad’s use of a picture of the old woman is a clear manifestation of the appeal to emotion fallacy. As some may have the soft spot for old people, the ad utilized the photo in the hopes of getting more supporters.

Apart from this, the ad is also guilty of committing the sanctimony fallacy. The ad says “Hindi kayo magsisi na si Jojo Binay ang inyong iboboto. Hindi kayo magsisisi dahil si Jojo Binay nirerespeto ang buhay ng bawat tao. Hindi kayo magsisisi dahil si Jojo Binay nagbibigay ng respeto at dignidad sa kababaihan.” (You won’t regret voting for Jojo Binay. You won’t regret [it] because Jojo Binay respects the life of every person. You won’t regret [it] because Jojo Binay gives respect and dignity to women.) Even though this may not be from his own mouth, using it for his own campaign material is enough to manifest the fallacy. It’s basically bringing his own name more recognition.

Circular reasoning is also seen in through the statement aforementioned. It is the fallacy in which the reasoner begins with what they are trying to end with. Starting the statement with “Hindi kayo magsisi na si Jojo Binay ang inyong iboboto.” (You won’t regret voting for Jojo Binay), a conclusion, before stating first the premises brings the statement in a full circle.

Binay should be careful in picking out and structuring the statements that he uses in his campaign materials. Also, next time, it is best for him to just reiterate his concrete plans for the country instead of using innocent people to indirectly endorse him. Thanks a lot. :)

#binay2016 #pilipinas2016 #election 2016

This advertisement is made up of so many different fallacies: begging the question, circular reasoning and wishful thinking.

Begging the question is a fallacy that assumes that the statement under question is true. So Binay, is this true? Will you actually make 2M jobs per year? Hmph, come back and tell me again in a year’s time, if you win that is.

The circular reasoning fallacy is a fallacy that occurs when the reasoner begins where they are trying to end with. So again, come back and fight me if this doesn’t happen. (I’m just kidding please don’t.)

The wishful thinking fallacy is a fallacy that says exactly that; “wishing” for something to be true. This advertisement is obviously wishful thinking, I mean come on, a couple of million jobs per year? When we barely have jobs currently? Pleaseeeeeeeee.

#binay #pilipinas2016 #election 2016

If you’re running for president, I don’t think this is a strong argument on why we should vote for you.

“Nagawa ko po iyan sa Makati.”

This is an example of multiple fallacies: fallacy of the single cause/causal oversimplification, fallacy of composition (Makati is not the Philippines), false equivalence (again, Makati is not the Philippines) and cherry picking.

Fallacy of the single cause/causal oversimplification is a fallacy of questionable cause and this occurs when it is assumed that something is caused by one thing when in reality it may be caused by a number of factors.

Fallacy of composition is the false assumption that something is true for this certain thing is true for the whole thing. In our example, VP Binay is using Makati as a basis for the whole of the Philippines.

The false equivalence fallacy describes a situation where there is a logical and apparent equivalence, but when in fact there is none. In our example of VP Binay here, how is he showing that what he has done in Makati? And how is this relevant to the Philippines?

The cherry picking fallacy is a fallacy that is used when something is suppressing evidence. In our example, it doesn’t show anything about how he does this or anything! How are we supposed to believe what he says?

“Aangat ang buhay dahil libre lahat ang kailangan ng mga bata sa eskwela.”

This is an example of a false analogy fallacy. It is a fallacy that assumes that A and B are alike in some aspects, therefore it is also alike in different aspects. Does this mean that your life will be better because school is free? What if you have problems at home? It doesn’t really make sense.

Please be more clear.

#binay #pilipinas2016 #election 2016

Fair warning

All the posts here are our critical views 1) on how Binay presents himself as a candidate and 2) on why we shouldn’t vote for him. So this is a fair warning, because the next posts will be fallacies on Binay’s facebook posts (from his official FB page).

#binay #pilipinas2016

Ummmmmmm bruh.

For one, this is another example of a personal ad hominem. This one is very similar to a previous post that attacks another presidential candidate, Rodrigo Duterte, as it again attacks Duterte’s killings.

This is also another example of an inconsistency ad hominem. As it says in the video, Binay had never really attacked Duterte before and Binay even said that he respected him and here he goes attacking Duterte? What?

Please.

#HinayHinayBinay

#PiliPinasDebates2016: Binay faces attacks on allegations of corruption

- (c) Anna Liza Vilas-Alavaren, 20 March 2016, from http://www.mb.com.ph/pilipinasdebates2016-binay-faces-attacks-on-allegations-of-corruption/#5Hh2cVsQzWYUzJxQ.99

As far as we are all concerned, allegations of corruption is a serious matter. But here we have a thick-skinned presidential candidate, his life being a big contradiction. As he claims that he supports the Freedom of Information (FOI) bill, he only takes lightly allegations of graft and corruption against him. This is yet another example of Inconsistency Ad Hominem.

Apart from this, during the #PiliPinasDebates2016, he broke one of the debate rules by bringing with him documents to the podium to clear his name of the allegation. When his fellow presidential candidate, Grace Poe, points this out, he shifted the viewers’ attention to Poe by bringing up her issue of citizenship. Certainly, Binay was misdirecting the people to make them forget about his fault. This is a clear case of the Red Herring fallacy.

Yes, Binay. You are clever. But don’t forget that the people you sell yourself to are more clever than you.

#HinayHinayBinay

Lo and behold, our beloved VP Binay using a prominent figure to advertise him for this upcoming elections. The TV commercial shows Manny Pacquiao, a world-renowned boxer and a politician in the Philippines, putting a good word or two for the presidential candidate.

This kind of strategy commits the Ad Verecundiam fallacy, which is simply appeal to authority. A person is guilty to such fallacy when he/she attempts to justify an argument through using a highly admired figure who supports his/her conclusion. It is clear in the ad that Binay made Pacquiao claim the same argument as his: that he is someone who came from poverty, just like Pacquiao himself and us. Pacquiao was also guilty of using the same tactic as the one he’s endorsing: the Argumentum Ad Misericordiam fallacy.

Still not effective, bruh.

#HinayHinayBinay

The moral problem is poverty

Okay.

Can you tell us why? Is this suggesting that the poor people themselves are the problem? And like the article suggests, is corruption not a moral problem? Being poor isn’t the only problem in this country...

Gosh Binay, and here I thought you were fighting for the poor people. Readers, this is another example of the inconsistency ad hominem. Granted, his statements are up to interpretation but he should be explaining himself to the people he is appealing to. Tsk, tsk, how are people supposed to trust you Binay?

(Told you I’d find more inconsistency statements :D)

#HinayHinayBinay

The tv commercial above depicts Binay as a child, grieving for the death of his mother. He states the reason of his mother’s death being poverty. They had no money to spend for her treatment back then, and that’s why she died. The commercial then ends with “Ang naging buhay ko, katulad ng marami sa inyo. Kaya sino pa bang magtutulungan, kundi tayo.” (What my life was like is the same as many of yours. So there is no one who’ll help each other but us.)

This, again, clearly exhibits the Argumentum Ad Misericordiam fallacy. The ad just showed, and dramatized at that, how tragic his life was back then to appeal to the viewers’ emotions and gain their sympathy. Instead of actually using the medium to present his plans of action once he gets seated, he just wasted the air time to hopefully make the audience relate to him.

Oh, Binay. Again? Really?

#HinayHinayBinay

This is an example of a personal ad hominem. Personal ad hominem is a fallacy that refutes a person’s claim by using his flaws and defects. In this video, VP Binay is addressing the viewer not to vote for (a person like) Mayor Duterte because he continusouly “brags” about the killings he has done in his province. VP Binay said that Mayor Duterte kills those who break the laws, and that these people are children, siblings of 4, and such, and that he does not deny these killings.

Committing this kind of fallacy makes it miss the point of the ad, which is to know Binay himself. Instead of utilizing the time to present his concrete platforms, which the people need to hear more, he just enumerated the reasons why they should not vote for one of his rivals, Mayor Duterte.

Not a good way to promote yourself, tbh.

#HinayHinayBinay

Trending Blogs

Recently Viewed Blogs

ONLY BINAY, ONLY BINAY (NOT)