ad hominem fallacy. The ad hominem fallacy happens when someone attempts to discredit someone's argument with personal attacks rather than the substance of the argument itself. Hasty generalization. Hasty generalization, also known as the overgeneralization fallacy, happens when making a claim based on evidence that is just too small. Red herring fallacy. A red herring is something that misleads or distracts from a relevant or important question. It might be used to change the subject. Tu quoque fallacy. Tu quoque is a technique that tends to discredit the opponent's argument by attacking the opponent's own personal behavior and actions as being inconsistent with their argument, therefore accusing hypocrisy instead of countering the actual argument. Slippery slope fallacy. In a slippery slope argument, a course of action is rejected because, with little or no evidence, one insists that it will lead to a chain reaction resulting in an undesirable end or ends. Special pleading fallacy. Special pleading happens when applying standards, principles, or rules to other people.

circumstances, while making oneself or certain circumstances exempt from the same critical criteria without providing adequate justification. Loaded question: a loaded question is a question that already contains an assumption. False dilemma fallacy: the false dilemma fallacy, also called the black and white fallacy, occurs when someone misrepresents an issue by offering only two options when more exist, or by presenting the options as mutually exclusive when they are not. Strawman fallacy: a strawman fallacy happens when one rebuts an argument by misconstruing it. Circular reasoning: the circular reasoning fallacy is an argument that assumes the very thing it is trying to prove is true. Instead of offering evidence, it simply repeats the conclusion, rendering the argument logically incoherent. Appeal to Authority fallacy: it is a form of argument in which the mere fact that an influential figure holds a certain position is used as evidence that the position itself is correct. Appeal to Nature fallacy: it's an argument in which it is proposed that a thing is good because it is natural.

bad because it is unnatural. Natural. It's a fallacy because the unstated primary premise what is natural is good is typically irrelevant and an opinion instead of a fact. Composition fallacy. It arises when one infers that something is true of the whole from the fact that it is true of some part of the whole. Division fallacy. The division fallacy occurs when one reasons that something that is true for a whole must also be true for all or some of its parts. Affirming the consequent. Affirming the consequent is the fallacy of taking a true conditional statement, such as if the lamp were broken, then the room would be dark, under certain assumptions like it is nighttime and the windows are closed, and invalidly inferring its converse the room is dark, so the lamp must be broken. Anecdotal fallacy. The anecdotal fallacy occurs when people use their limited personal experience to draw sweeping conclusions about a given topic. Appeal to emotion fallacy. It's a technique characterized by the manipulation of the other person's

emotions in order to win an argument, especially in the absence of factual evidence burden of proof fallacy. The burden of proof lies with the one who makes a claim, not the one who denies it. The burden of proof fallacy happens when a person tries to remove their need to provide proof for many reasons. No true Scotsman fallacy. It's an attempt to defend a generalization of a certain group by excluding any counterexamples for not being pure enough. Texas Sharpshooter fallacy. The Texas Sharpshooter fallacy takes its name from the metaphor of a gunman shooting and then drawing targets around the bullet hole clusters to make it look like he hit the target. It illustrates how people first figure out what their conclusion is and then go looking for data that supports it, ignoring differences and randomness. Suppressed correlative. The attempt to redefine one of two mutually exclusive options so that one alternative encompasses the other, thus making one alternative impossible. Something like I need to know if we should stop for lunch or not.

either hungry or not hungry, which is it? If being hungry means being able to eat, I am always hungry. Personal incredulity fallacy is committed when the arguer presumes that whatever is true must be easy to understand or to imagine. Ambiguity fallacy happens when an unclear phrase with multiple definitions is used within the argument; therefore, it does not support the conclusion. Genetic fallacy is the act of rejecting or accepting an argument solely on the basis of its origin rather than its content. Middle Ground fallacy is the fallacy that the truth is always in the middle of two opposites. Affirming a disjunct fallacy occurs when, given an either-or scenario, you wrongly assume that if one statement or outcome is true, the other one cannot be true. Appeal to tradition happens when we ignore the evidence that we should change because we have been doing something for a long time. Sunk cost fallacy is our tendency to continue with something

we've invested money, effort, or time into, even if the current costs outweigh the benefits. Appeal to ignorance happens when someone asserts that a proposition is true because it has not yet been proven false, or that a proposition is false because it has not yet been proven true. Continuum fallacy is the argument that two states or conditions cannot be considered distinct or do not exist at all because between them there exists a Continuum of States. Equivocation, the equivocation fallacy, refers to the use of an ambiguous word or phrase in more than one sense within the same argument. Faulty analogy, a faulty analogy, is saying that two things are alike in other ways just because they are alike in one way. Denying the antecedent, denying the antecedent, infers the inverse from an original statement. It's something like if you are a ski instructor, then you have a job. You are not a ski instructor; therefore, you have no job. False cause, a false cause fallacy, occurs when someone incorrectly assumes that something causes something else.

without enough proof, usually using just a correlation as proof, defines a fallacy. It happens when one defines a term in such a way that makes one's position much easier to defend. Ecological fallacy. Ecological fallacies assume what is true for a population is true for the individual members of that population. Ecological fallacy. Ecological fallacy is the faulty argument that the true meaning of a word is its oldest or original meaning. Quoting out of context. It's a fallacy in which a passage from a quote is removed from its surrounding matter in such a way as to distort its intended meaning. Context may be omitted intentionally or accidentally. False equivalence. It's a fallacy in which an equivalence is drawn between two subjects based on flawed or false reasoning. Historian's fallacy. The historian's fallacy occurs when one assumes that decision-makers in the past viewed events from the same perspective and had the same information as those subsequently analyzing the decision. Inflation of conflict. It's the error of exaggerating the amount of disagreement.

in a field, in order to invalidate claims in that field. Incomplete comparison is a misleading argument popular in advertising. Since the assertion is incomplete, it cannot be refuted. Ludic fallacy is a term used to describe how people mistake the kind of uncertainty found in games for the kind of uncertainty found in real life. For example, organized competitive fighting trains the athlete to focus on the game and, in order not to dissipate his concentration, to ignore the possibility of what is not specifically allowed by the rules. Moralistic fallacy making statements about what is on the basis of claims about what ought to be, in violation of fact-value distinction. Nirvana fallacy comparing a realistic solution with an idealized one and discounting or even dismissing the realistic solution as a result of comparing it to a perfect world or impossible standard. Proof by assertion is a fallacy in which a proposition is repeatedly restated regardless of contradiction and reputation. The proposition can sometimes be repeated until any challenges or opposition cease.

letting the proponent assert it as fact solely due to a lack of Challengers. Cherry-picking it's the act of pointing to individual cases or data that seem to confirm a particular position, while ignoring a significant portion of related and similar cases or data that may contradict that position. Psychologists fallacy it's a fallacy that occurs when an observer assumes that his or her subjective experience reflects the true nature of an event. Reification fallacy it happens when an abstract concept is treated as if it were a concrete real event, something like saying that Evolution selects which traits are passed on to Future Generations, while evolution is not a conscious entity with Will. Retrospective determinism it's the thought that because something happened under some circumstances, it was therefore bound to happen due to those circumstances. Thought-terminating cliche it's a form of loaded language, often passing as Folk wisdom, with the function of stopping an argument from proceeding further, ending the debate with a cliche rather than a point. Fallacy of the single cause it

occurs when it is assumed that there is a single simple cause of an outcome, when in reality it may have been caused by a number of small causes. Appeal to the stone happens when a dismissal is made by stating or reiterating that the argument is absurd without providing further argumentation. Ignoratio Elenchi, also called missing the point, is the fallacy of presenting an argument that may or may not be logically valid and sound, but whose conclusion fails to address the issue in question. Circumstantial ad hominem stating that the arguer's personal interest in advancing a conclusion means that their conclusion is wrong. Tone policing, an ad hominem fallacy that focuses on the emotion behind a message rather than the message itself as a discrediting tactic. Association fallacy is the fallacy that asserts that properties of one thing must also be properties of another thing if both things belong to the same group. Appeal to accomplishment is kind of an appeal to Authority fallacy. It happens when an

assertion is deemed true or false based on the accomplishments of the proposer. Corders reply when a criticism is dismissed by claiming that the critic lacks sufficient knowledge, credentials, or training to credibly comment on the subject matter. Appeal to consequences, it's an argument that concludes a hypothesis to be either true or false based on whether the premise leads to desirable or undesirable consequences. Appeal to novelty, it happens when a proposal is claimed to be superior or better solely because it is new or modern. Bolism, it is the assumption and assertion that an argument is flawed or false because of the arguer's identity. Chronological snobbery, chronological snobbery considers modern ideas superior to those from earlier ages just because they are modern. It's a form of appeal to novelty. I'm entitled to my opinion fallacy when a person discredits any opposition by claiming that they are entitled to their opinion instead of logically analyzing said opposition. Two wrongs make a right, it's an argument in which an allegation of wrongdoing is countered with a

similar allegation vacuous truth a claim that is technically true but meaningless such as claiming that no mobile phones in the room are on. When there are no mobile phones in the room fallacy fallacy it's saying that when an argument contains a fallacy its conclusion must be false. If you like this format, check out this video. YouTube thinks that you'll like it.

Every Logical Fallacy Explained in 11 Minutes

I explain interesting stuff using paint.

💼 Business Mail: operamp4@gmail.com


Every Logical Fallacy Explained in 11 Minutes

Every Logical Fallacy Explained in 11 Minutes

스크립트