Scribd
Upload
7 views

Fallacies

The document defines and explains examples of common logical fallacies that can undermine arguments. Some of the fallacies discussed include ad hominem, straw man, appeal to emotion, false dilemma, slippery slope, appeal to tradition, and red herring.

Uploaded by

Lucianna
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
7 views

Fallacies

The document defines and explains examples of common logical fallacies that can undermine arguments. Some of the fallacies discussed include ad hominem, straw man, appeal to emotion, false dilemma, slippery slope, appeal to tradition, and red herring.

Uploaded by

Lucianna
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 3

Ad Hominem: Attacking the character or personal traits of an opponent rather than

addressing their argument.

Straw Man: Distorting or misrepresenting an opponent's argument to make it easier to


attack.

Appeal to Emotion: Manipulating emotions to win an argument instead of relying on reason


and evidence.

False Dilemma: Presenting only two extreme options as if they are the only choices when
there are more possibilities.

Appeal to Authority: Using the opinion of an authority figure as evidence without


considering the expert's credentials or relevance.

Hasty Generalization: Drawing a broad conclusion based on a limited sample of evidence.

Circular Reasoning: Restating the argument as evidence to support itself.

Slippery Slope: Claiming that a small first step will inevitably lead to a chain of negative
consequences.

Appeal to Tradition: Arguing that something is valid or better because it's been done a
certain way for a long time.

Post Hoc Fallacy (Causal Fallacy): Assuming that because one event happened after
another, the first event caused the second.

Appeal to Ignorance: Arguing that a claim is true because it hasn't been proven false, or
false because it hasn't been proven true.

Red Herring: Introducing irrelevant information or arguments to divert attention from the
main issue.

Equivocation: Using ambiguous language to mislead or obscure the real meaning of an


argument.

Appeal to Popularity (Bandwagon Fallacy): Asserting that something must be true or good
because many people believe or support it.

Burden of Proof Fallacy: Shifting the burden of proof onto the opponent to disprove a claim
rather than providing evidence for one's own claim.

False Analogy: Drawing a comparison between two unrelated things to make a point.

No True Scotsman: Reinterpreting evidence or shifting the goalposts when an example that
contradicts a claim is presented.
Genetic Fallacy: Rejecting an argument based on its origin or history rather than its merits.

Fallacy Fallacy: Concluding that an argument is false because it contains a fallacy, without
evaluating the argument's substance.

Loaded Question: Asking a question that contains an assumption or bias.

Tu Quoque (You Too): Dismissing an opponent's argument by pointing out their own
hypocrisy.

Composition Fallacy: Assuming that what is true for the parts is true for the whole.

Division Fallacy: Assuming that what is true for the whole is true for the parts.

Appeal to Nature: Arguing that something is good because it is natural or bad because it is
not natural.

Black-and-White Fallacy: Presenting a situation as having only two possible outcomes


when there are other options.

Special Pleading: Applying a double standard to exempt one's own position from criticism.

The Texas Sharpshooter Fallacy: Cherry-picking data or focusing on specific details to suit
one's argument while ignoring the bigger picture.

Appeal to Complexity: Arguing that something is true because it is too complex for the
average person to understand.

Begging the Question: Assuming the conclusion is true in the premise.

Moving the Goalposts: Changing the criteria for acceptance of an argument after the
argument has been presented.

Middle Ground Fallacy: Assuming that a compromise between two positions is the correct
or best solution.

False Cause Fallacy: Assuming that because two events correlate, one must have caused
the other.

The Fallacy of Sunk Costs: Continuing a behavior or endeavor because of the resources
already invested, even if it's no longer rational.

Anecdotal Fallacy: Using personal anecdotes or isolated examples as evidence to support


a general claim.

Ambiguity Fallacy: Using ambiguous language to deceive or confuse.


The Fallacy of the Undistributed Middle: Failing to connect the middle term of a syllogism
with the major and minor terms.

You might also like