What are some logical fallacies in Old Major's chapter 1 speech in Animal Farm?

One logical fallacy in Old Major's speech is the either/or fallacy. This fallacy, or false reasoning, asserts that one of two extreme possibilities is the only option available. The sentiment "America: love it or leave it" is an example of the either/or fallacy. That statement does not leave open the possibility that you could love your country and yet want to critique it. Likewise, Old Major allows for no compromise or middle ground for the animals on the subject of coexisting with humans. He says:

Never listen when they tell you that Man and the animals have a common interest, that the prosperity of the one is the prosperity of the others. It is all lies. Man serves the interests of no creature except himself. And among us animals let there be perfect unity, perfect comradeship in the struggle. All men are enemies. All animals are comrades."

It should be noted that Old Major's logic is that of the Soviet communist party, which in the USSR believed there could be no compromise with capitalism: the capitalist system must be utterly toppled, and if someone said otherwise, they were the enemy.

Old Major also uses the ad hominem fallacy. This means "against the man." In ad hominem arguments, we attack the person and not their argument. We say that one shouldn't accept that person's argument, no matter how sound, because the person making it is a bad person. Actually, bad people can make logically sound arguments. This fallacy quickly can morph into racism or other forms of stereotyping. Old Major likewise says mankind can never do anything good, simply because it is mankind.

It is interesting to note how many times the old prize boar, Major, uses the word all in his speech to the animals as he calls for rebellion against Mr. Jones.  Of course, the use of this all indicates that he speaks in generalities which are often fallacious.  For, his premises, which are statements that are offered in support of a claim being made that is the conclusion are too sweeping in nature to be logical and sound.  In Chapter I, he makes the commits the following logical fallacies:

1. Hasty/Sweeping Generalizations

In his efforts to convince the animals to revolt against the farmer, Mr. Jones, Old Major tells them such things as "Man is the only real enemy we have," "All the habits of Man are evil," and "All animals are comrades."  Thus, Old Major suggests that every man is evil, and every animal is good.

2. Appeal to Emotion

With his stirring song, Beasts of England, Old Mjor rouses the emotions of the animals until they sing in unison the tune; excited by the song. However, their noise rouses Mr.Jones from bed, and he fires his shotgun to quiet them all.

3. Confusing Cause and Effect

Because the animals have much misery caused by the actions of Mr. Jones, Old Major assumes that all their problems are directly caused by Man, "Man is the only real enemy we have," he mistakenly reasons. 

4. Poisoning the Well

This type of false reasoning tries to discredit the opposition by creating biases against the person.  In Chapter I, for instance, Old Major rants against Man, telling the other animals that they have been robbed of their eggs and milk and foals.  Further, he tells the pigs that their future is the meat packing shop.  Thus, the animals are filled with words that increase their antipathy toward the owner.

What are examples of logical fallacies in Animal Farm?

These are all propaganda techniques, or logical fallacies.  Ad populum means that everyone believes it’s true, so it must be true.  An example of this is the exploitation of Snowball.  Everyone believes that Snowball was a traitor, so therefore he must be a traitor!

Two wrongs make a right means if one wrong is committed, it can be corrected with another wrong.  It basically means that you are making an excuse for the fact that one person did something wrong, but another person did something wrong so it must be all right.  For example, when the animals run out of food so the pigs respond but cutting rations.

Guilt by association is common in totalitarian regimes.  It basically means that people who are part of a group are all guilty, or people associated with the “guilty” are all guilty.  For example, those who were supporters of Snowball were executed.  Another example is when several geese were executed.

Ad hominem is the idea of attacking a person’s character instead of his ideas.  It can often result in slinging insults instead of actually debating facts.  For example, criticisms of Snowball were ad hominem because Napoleon could not attack his ideas.

Can you provide an example of a non-sequitur fallacy in Animal Farm?

Another example of a non-sequitur fallacy is the statement made by Squealer in Chapter 2:

The whole management and organization of this farm depend on us. Day and night we are watching over your welfare. It is for your sake that we drink that milk and eat those apples. Do you know what would happen if we pigs failed in our duty? Jones would come back! Yes, Jones would come back!

In the above quote, Squealer has been sent by Napoleon and Snowball to explain why the milk and apples have been appropriated for use by the pigs only.

Notice his reasoning: Day and night, the pigs are tasked with watching over the welfare of all the animals. They are in charge of the management of the farm. Therefore, the pigs alone must eat the apples and drink the milk.

Squealer does not explain how doing these two things helps the pigs manage the farm more effectively. Better nutrition may contribute to optimum health, but that doesn't necessarily translate into better management by the pigs.

Squealer also doesn't explain why depriving the other animals of the two nutritious foods is a positive thing. If the pigs are "brain-workers" and the other animals must do the manual work, shouldn't it follow that both groups of animals need nutritious food to perform at peak capacity?

Moreover, Squealer maintains that poor management of the farm will actually inspire Jones to return. This is a non sequitur fallacy. Squealer's assertion does not match his reasoning.

The truth is, poor management of the farm is unlikely to drive Jones back. In Chapter One, we learn that Jones used to be a capable farmer. However, after losing money in a lawsuit, he became an alcoholic. The farm was neglected, weeds grew, and the animals were underfed. Eventually (due to their suffering), the animals drove Jones out.

So, Squealer used a non sequitur fallacy when he argued for exclusive use of the apples and milk by the pigs.

In George Orwell's fable, Animal Farm, there are several non-sequitur arguments; that is, arguments in which a conclusion does not follow logically after the initial statement. Here are s few examples:

• In Chapter 1, the old Major makes sweeping generalizations and utters some non-sequiturs.  He tells the animals,

"Only get rid of Man, and the produce ouf our laboour would be our own.  Amost overnight we could become rich and free."

•  In Chapter 3, some of the animals struggle with learning the alphabet and how to read things like the Seven Commandments. So, Snowball comes before them and declares that the seven commandments can be reduced to a single maxim:  "Four legs good, two legs bad." This, of course,is a sweeping generalization, but it also is a also a conclusion that does not follow logically for all circumstances.
• In Chapter 7, Squealer contends that Snowball's "rebellion" was caused not by vanity and ambition, but by his being in league with Mr. Jones.  Of course, there is no logical reason for Snowball's having been in collusion with Jones as the supposed secret documents that Squealer claims to have cannot be produced.