A fallacy

Fallacy

In logic and rhetoric, a fallacy is usually an incorrect argumentation in reasoning resulting in a misconception or presumption. By accident or design, fallacies may exploit emotional triggers in the listener or interlocutor , or take advantage of social relationships between people...

 is incorrect argumentation in logic

Logic

In philosophy, Logic is the formal systematic study of the principles of valid inference and correct reasoning. Logic is used in most intellectual activities, but is studied primarily in the disciplines of philosophy, mathematics, semantics, and computer science...

 and rhetoric

Rhetoric

Rhetoric is the art of discourse, an art that aims to improve the facility of speakers or writers who attempt to inform, persuade, or motivate particular audiences in specific situations. As a subject of formal study and a productive civic practice, rhetoric has played a central role in the Western...

 resulting in a lack of validity

Validity

In logic, argument is valid if and only if its conclusion is entailed by its premises, a formula is valid if and only if it is true under every interpretation, and an argument form is valid if and only if every argument of that logical form is valid....

, or more generally, a lack of soundness

Soundness

In mathematical logic, a logical system has the soundness property if and only if its inference rules prove only formulas that are valid with respect to its semantics. In most cases, this comes down to its rules having the property of preserving truth, but this is not the case in general. The word...

.

Formal fallacies

A formal fallacy

Formal fallacy

In philosophy, a formal fallacy is a pattern of reasoning that is always wrong. This is due to a flaw in the logical structure of the argument which renders the argument invalid...

 is an error in logic that can be seen in the argument's form without an understanding of the argument's content. All formal fallacies are specific types of non sequiturs

Non sequitur (logic)

Non sequitur , in formal logic, is an argument in which its conclusion does not follow from its premises. In a non sequitur, the conclusion could be either true or false, but the argument is fallacious because there is a disconnection between the premise and the conclusion. All formal fallacies...

.

• Appeal to authority: (argumentum ad verecundiam) deductively fallacious; even legitimate authorities speaking on their areas of expertise may affirm a falsehood. However, if not using a deductive argument, a logical fallacy is only asserted when the source is not a legitimate expert on the topic at hand, or their conclusion(s) are in direct opposition to other expert consensus. Appeal to authority does not condone to agreeing to the argument.
• Appeal to probability
  Appeal to probability
  An appeal to probability is a justification based on probability, sometimes regarded as a logical fallacy, when an unwarranted assumption that something will happen, because it can happen, or when the odds of an occurrence are unrealistically played down in lieu of appropriate precaution.Although a...
  
  : assumes that because something could happen, it is inevitable that it will happen.
• Argument from fallacy
  Argument from fallacy
  Argument from fallacy is the formal fallacy of analyzing an argument and inferring that, since it contains a fallacy, its conclusion must be false...
  
  : assumes that if an argument for some conclusion is fallacious, then the conclusion itself is false.
• Base rate fallacy
  Base rate fallacy
  The base rate fallacy, also called base rate neglect or base rate bias, is an error that occurs when the conditional probability of some hypothesis H given some evidence E is assessed without taking into account the "base rate" or "prior probability" of H and the total probability of evidence...
  
  : making a probability judgement based on conditional probabilities
  Conditional probability
  In probability theory, the "conditional probability of A given B" is the probability of A if B is known to occur. It is commonly notated P, and sometimes P_B. P can be visualised as the probability of event A when the sample space is restricted to event B...
  
  , without taking into account the effect of prior probabilities
  Prior probability
  In Bayesian statistical inference, a prior probability distribution, often called simply the prior, of an uncertain quantity p is the probability distribution that would express one's uncertainty about p before the "data"...
  
  .
• Conjunction fallacy
  Conjunction fallacy
  The conjunction fallacy is a logical fallacy that occurs when it is assumed that specific conditions are more probable than a single general one.The most often-cited example of this fallacy originated with Amos Tversky and Daniel Kahneman:...
  
  : assumption that an outcome simultaneously satisfying multiple conditions is more probable than an outcome satisfying a single one of them.
• Masked man fallacy
  Masked man fallacy
  The masked man fallacy is a fallacy of formal logic in which substitution of identical designators in a true statement can lead to a false one.One form of the fallacy may be summarized as follows:* Premise 1: I know who X is....
  
   (illicit substitution of identicals): the substitution of identical designators in a true statement can lead to a false one.

Propositional fallacies

Propositional

Propositional calculus

In mathematical logic, a propositional calculus or logic is a formal system in which formulas of a formal language may be interpreted as representing propositions. A system of inference rules and axioms allows certain formulas to be derived, called theorems; which may be interpreted as true...

 fallacies:

• Affirming a disjunct: concluded that one logical disjunction
  Logical disjunction
  In logic and mathematics, a two-place logical connective or, is a logical disjunction, also known as inclusive disjunction or alternation, that results in true whenever one or more of its operands are true. E.g. in this context, "A or B" is true if A is true, or if B is true, or if both A and B are...
  
   must be false because the other disjunct is true; A or B; A; therefore not B.
• Affirming the consequent
  Affirming the consequent
  Affirming the consequent, sometimes called converse error, is a formal fallacy, committed by reasoning in the form:#If P, then Q.#Q.#Therefore, P....
  
  : the antecedent
  Antecedent (logic)
  An antecedent is the first half of a hypothetical proposition.Examples:* If P, then Q.This is a nonlogical formulation of a hypothetical proposition...
  
   in an indicative conditional is claimed to be true because the consequent
  Consequent
  A consequent is the second half of a hypothetical proposition. In the standard form of such a proposition, it is the part that follows "then".Examples:* If P, then Q.Q is the consequent of this hypothetical proposition....
  
   is true; if A, then B; B, therefore A.
• Denying the antecedent
  Denying the antecedent
  Denying the antecedent, sometimes also called inverse error, is a formal fallacy, committed by reasoning in the form:The name denying the antecedent derives from the premise "not P", which denies the "if" clause of the conditional premise....
  
  : the consequent
  Consequent
  A consequent is the second half of a hypothetical proposition. In the standard form of such a proposition, it is the part that follows "then".Examples:* If P, then Q.Q is the consequent of this hypothetical proposition....
  
   in an indicative conditional
  Indicative conditional
  In natural languages, an indicative conditional is the logical operation given by statements of the form "If A then B". Unlike the material conditional, an indicative conditional does not have a stipulated definition...
  
   is claimed to be false because the antecedent
  Antecedent (logic)
  An antecedent is the first half of a hypothetical proposition.Examples:* If P, then Q.This is a nonlogical formulation of a hypothetical proposition...
  
   is false; if A, then B; not A, therefore not B.

Quantificational fallacies

Quantification

Quantification

Quantification has several distinct senses. In mathematics and empirical science, it is the act of counting and measuring that maps human sense observations and experiences into members of some set of numbers. Quantification in this sense is fundamental to the scientific method.In logic,...

al fallacies:

• Existential fallacy
  Existential fallacy
  The existential fallacy, or existential instantiation, is a logical fallacy in Boolean logic while it is not in Aristotelian logic. In an existential fallacy, we presuppose that a class has members even when we are not explicitly told so; that is, we assume that the class has existential import.An...
  
  : an argument has two universal premises and a particular conclusion.

Formal syllogistic fallacies

Syllogistic fallacies

Syllogistic fallacy

Syllogistic fallacies are logical fallacies that occur in syllogisms. They include:Any syllogism type :*fallacy of four termsOccurring in categorical syllogisms:*related to affirmative or negative premises:...

 are logical fallacies that occur in syllogisms.

• Affirmative conclusion from a negative premise
  Affirmative conclusion from a negative premise
  Affirmative conclusion from a negative premise is a logical fallacy that is committed when a categorical syllogism has a positive conclusion, but one or two negative premises.For example:...
  
   (illicit negative): when a categorical syllogism has a positive conclusion, but at least one negative premise.
• Fallacy of exclusive premises
  Fallacy of exclusive premises
  The fallacy of exclusive premises is a syllogistic fallacy committed in a categorical syllogism that is invalid because both of its premises are negative.Example of an EOO-4 invalid proposition:...
  
  : a categorical syllogism that is invalid because both of its premises are negative.
• Fallacy of four terms
  Fallacy of four terms
  The fallacy of four terms is the logical fallacy that occurs when a syllogism has four terms rather than the requisite three. This form of argument is thus invalid.- Explanation :Categorical syllogisms always have three terms:...
  
   (quaternio terminorum): a categorical syllogism that has four terms.
• Illicit major
  Illicit major
  Illicit major is a logical fallacy committed in a categorical syllogism that is invalid because its major term is undistributed in the major premise but distributed in the conclusion.This fallacy has the following argument form:#All A are B...
  
  : a categorical syllogism that is invalid because its major term is not distributed in the major premise but distributed in the conclusion.
• Illicit minor
  Illicit minor
  Illicit minor is a logical fallacy committed in a categorical syllogism that is invalid because its minor term is undistributed in the minor premise but distributed in the conclusion....
  
  : a categorical syllogism that is invalid because its minor term is not distributed in the minor premise but distributed in the conclusion.
• Negative conclusion from affirmative premises
  Negative conclusion from affirmative premises
  Negative conclusion from affirmative premises is a syllogistic fallacy committed when a categorical syllogism has a negative conclusion yet both premises are affirmative...
  
   (illicit affirmative): when a categorical syllogism has a negative conclusion but affirmative premises.
• Fallacy of the undistributed middle
  Fallacy of the undistributed middle
  The fallacy of the undistributed middle is a logical fallacy, and more specifically a formal fallacy, that is committed when the middle term in a categorical syllogism is not distributed in the major premise...
  
  : the middle term in a categorical syllogism is not distributed.

Informal fallacies

Informal fallacies

Informal fallacy

An informal fallacy is an argument whose stated premises fail to support their proposed conclusion. The deviation in an informal fallacy often stems from a flaw in the path of reasoning that links the premises to the conclusion...

 are arguments that are fallacious for reasons other than structural (formal) flaws and which usually require examination of the argument's content.

• Argument from ignorance
  Argument from ignorance
  Argument from ignorance, also known as argumentum ad ignorantiam or "appeal to ignorance" , is a fallacy in informal logic. It asserts that a proposition is true because it has not yet been proven false, it is "generally accepted"...
  
   (appeal to ignorance, argumentum ad ignorantiam): assuming that a claim is true (or false) because it has not been proven false (true) or cannot be proven false (true).
• Argument from repetition (argumentum ad nauseam): signifies that it has been discussed extensively until nobody cares to discuss it anymore
• Argument from silence
  Argument from silence
  The argument from silence is generally a conclusion based on silence of opponent, failing to give evidence. In the field of classical studies, it often refers to the deduction from the lack of references to a subject in the available writings of an author to the conclusion that he was ignorant of it...
  
   (argumentum e silentio): where the conclusion is based on silence of opponent, failing to give proof, based on "lack of evidence"
• Argumentum verbosium: See Proof by verbosity, below.
• Begging the question
  Begging the question
  Begging the question is a type of logical fallacy in which the proposition to be proven is assumed implicitly or explicitly in the premise....
  
   (petitio principii): where the conclusion of an argument is implicitly or explicitly assumed in one of the premises
• (shifting the) Burden of proof  (see: onus probandi): I need not prove my claim, you must prove it is false
• Circular cause and consequence: where the consequence of the phenomenon is claimed to be its root cause
• Continuum fallacy
  Continuum fallacy
  The continuum fallacy is an informal logical fallacy closely related to the sorites paradox, or paradox of the heap...
  
   (fallacy of the beard, line-drawing fallacy, sorites fallacy, fallacy of the heap, bald man fallacy): improperly rejecting a claim for being imprecise.
• Correlation does not imply causation
  Correlation does not imply causation
  "Correlation does not imply causation" is a phrase used in science and statistics to emphasize that correlation between two variables does not automatically imply that one causes the other "Correlation does not imply causation" (related to "ignoring a common cause" and questionable cause) is a...
  
   (cum hoc ergo propter hoc): a faulty assumption that correlation between two variables implies that one causes the other.
• Correlative-based fallacies
  Correlative-based fallacies
  In logic, correlative-based fallacies, also known as fallacies of distraction, are logical fallacies based on correlative conjunctions.-Correlative conjunctions:...
  
  
  • Suppressed correlative
    Suppressed correlative
    The fallacy of suppressed correlative is a type of argument that tries to redefine a correlative so that one alternative encompasses the other, i.e. making one alternative impossible...
    
    : where a correlative is redefined so that one alternative is made impossible.
• Equivocation
  Equivocation
  Equivocation is classified as both a formal and informal logical fallacy. It is the misleading use of a term with more than one meaning or sense...
  
  : the misleading use of a term with more than one meaning (by glossing over which meaning is intended at a particular time)
  • Ambiguous middle term: a common ambiguity in syllogisms in which the middle term
    Middle term
    The middle term must distributed in at least one premises but not in the conclusion of a categorical syllogism. The major term and the minor terms, also called the end terms, do appear in the conclusion.Example:...
    
     is equivocated
• Ecological fallacy
  Ecological fallacy
  An ecological fallacy is a logical fallacy in the interpretation of statistical data in an ecological study, whereby inferences about the nature of specific individuals are based solely upon aggregate statistics collected for the group to which those individuals belong...
  
  : inferences about the nature of specific individuals are based solely upon aggregate statistics collected for the group to which those individuals belong.
• Etymological fallacy
  Etymological fallacy
  The etymological fallacy is a genetic fallacy that holds, erroneously, that the historical meaning of a word or phrase is necessarily similar to its actual present-day meaning. This is a linguistic misconception, mistakenly identifying a word's current semantic field with its etymology...
  
  : which reasons that the original or historical meaning of a word or phrase is necessarily similar to its actual present-day meaning.
• Fallacy of composition
  Fallacy of composition
  The fallacy of composition arises when one infers that something is true of the whole from the fact that it is true of some part of the whole...
  
  : assuming that something true of part of a whole must also be true of the whole
• Fallacy of division
  Fallacy of division
  A fallacy of division occurs when one reasons logically that something true of a thing must also be true of all or some of its parts.An example:# A Boeing 747 can fly unaided across the ocean.# A Boeing 747 has jet engines....
  
  : assuming that something true of a thing must also be true of all or some of its parts
• False dilemma
  False dilemma
  A false dilemma is a type of logical fallacy that involves a situation in which only two alternatives are considered, when in fact there are additional options...
  
   (false dichotomy, fallacy of bifurcation, black-or-white fallacy): two alternative statements are held to be the only possible options, when in reality there are more.
• If-by-whiskey
  If-by-whiskey
  In political discourse, if-by-whiskey is a relativist fallacy where the response to a question is contingent on the questioner's opinions and use of words with strong positive or negative connotations...
  
  : an argument that supports both sides of an issue by using terms that are selectively emotionally sensitive.
• Fallacy of many questions (complex question, fallacy of presupposition, loaded question, plurium interrogationum): someone asks a question that presupposes something that has not been proven or accepted by all the people involved. This fallacy is often used rhetorically, so that the question limits direct replies to those that serve the questioner's agenda.
• Ludic fallacy
  Ludic fallacy
  The ludic fallacy is a term coined by Nassim Nicholas Taleb in his 2007 book The Black Swan. "Ludic" is from the Latin ludus, meaning "play, game, sport, pastime." It is summarized as "the misuse of games to model real-life situations." Taleb explains the fallacy as "basing studies of chance on the...
  
  : the belief that the outcomes of a non-regulated random occurrences can be encapsulated by a statistic; a failure to take into account unknown unknowns in determining the probability of an event's taking place.
• Fallacy of the single cause
  Fallacy of the single cause
  The fallacy of the single cause, also known as causal oversimplification, is a fallacy of questionable cause that 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 only jointly sufficient causes.Often after a tragedy...
  
   (causal oversimplification): it is assumed that there is one, simple cause of an outcome when in reality it may have been caused by a number of only jointly sufficient causes.
• False attribution
  False attribution
  The fallacy of a false attribution occurs when an advocate appeals to an irrelevant, unqualified, unidentified, biased or fabricated source in support of an argument...
  
  : an advocate appeals to an irrelevant, unqualified, unidentified, biased or fabricated source in support of an argument
  • Fallacy of quoting out of context
    Fallacy of quoting out of context
    The practice of quoting out of context, sometimes referred to as "contextomy" or "quote mining", is a logical fallacy and a type of false attribution in which a passage is removed from its surrounding matter in such a way as to distort its intended meaning....
    
     (contextomy): refers to the selective excerpting of words from their original context in a way that distorts the source's intended meaning.
• Argument to moderation (false compromise, middle ground, fallacy of the mean): assuming that the compromise between two positions is always correct
• Gambler's fallacy
  Gambler's fallacy
  The Gambler's fallacy, also known as the Monte Carlo fallacy , and also referred to as the fallacy of the maturity of chances, is the belief that if deviations from expected behaviour are observed in repeated independent trials of some random process, future deviations in the opposite direction are...
  
  : the incorrect belief that separate, independent events can affect the likelihood of another random event.
• Historian's fallacy
  Historian's fallacy
  The historian's fallacy is a logical fallacy that occurs when one assumes that decision makers of the past viewed events from the same perspective and having the same information as those subsequently analyzing the decision...
  
  : occurs when one assumes that decision makers of the past viewed events from the same perspective and having the same information as those subsequently analyzing the decision. (Not to be confused with presentism
  Presentism (literary and historical analysis)
  Presentism is a mode of literary or historical analysis in which present-day ideas and perspectives are anachronistically introduced into depictions or interpretations of the past...
  
  , which is a mode of historical analysis in which present-day ideas, such as moral standards, are projected into the past.)
• Homunculus fallacy: where a "middle-man" is used for explanation, this usually leads to regressive middle-man. Explanations without actually explaining the real nature of a function or a process. Instead, it explains the concept in terms of the concept itself, without first defining or explaining the original concept.
• Incomplete comparison
  Incomplete comparison
  An incomplete comparison is a misleading argument popular in advertising. For example, an advertiser might say "product X is better". This is an incomplete assertion, so it can't be refuted. A complete assertion, such as "product X sells for a lower price than product Y" or "the new product X...
  
  : where not enough information is provided to make a complete comparison
• Inconsistent comparison
  Inconsistent comparison
  An inconsistent comparison is a misleading argument popular in advertising. For example, an advertisement might say "product X is less expensive than product A, has better quality than product B, and has more features than product C". This is designed to give the impression that product X is...
  
  : where different methods of comparison are used, leaving one with a false impression of the whole comparison
• Intentional fallacy
  Intentional fallacy
  Intentional fallacy, in literary criticism, addresses the assumption that the meaning intended by the author of a literary work is of primary importance. By characterizing this assumption as a "fallacy", a critic suggests that the author's intention is not important. The term is an important...
  
  : addresses the assumption that the meaning intended by the author of a literary work is of primary importance
• Ignoratio elenchi
  Ignoratio elenchi
  Ignoratio elenchi is the informal fallacy of presenting an argument that may in itself be valid, but does not address the issue in question...
  
  (irrelevant conclusion, missing the point): an argument that may in itself be valid, but does not address the issue in question.
• Kettle logic
  Kettle logic
  Kettle Logic is a type of informal fallacy wherein one uses multiple arguments to defend a point, but the arguments themselves are inconsistent....
  
  : using multiple inconsistent arguments to defend a position.
• Mind projection fallacy
  Mind projection fallacy
  Mind projection fallacy, as coined by physicist and bayesian philosopher E.T. Jaynes, occurs when one takes for sure that the way he sees the world reflects the way the world really is, going as far as assuming the real existence of imagined objects....
  
  : when one considers the way he sees the world as the way the world really is.
• Moving the goalposts (raising the bar): argument in which evidence presented in response to a specific claim is dismissed and some other (often greater) evidence is demanded
• Nirvana fallacy
  Nirvana fallacy
  The nirvana fallacy is the logical error of comparing actual things with unrealistic, idealized alternatives. It can also refer to the tendency to assume that there is a perfect solution to a particular problem...
  
   (perfect solution fallacy): when solutions to problems are rejected because they are not perfect.
• Onus probandi: from Latin "onus probandi incumbit ei qui dicit, non ei qui negat" the burden of proof is on the person who makes the claim, not on the person who denies (or questions the claim). It is a particular case of the "argumentum ad ignorantiam" fallacy, here the burden is shifted on the person defending against the assertion
• Petitio principii: see begging the question
• Post hoc ergo propter hoc
  Post hoc ergo propter hoc
  Post hoc ergo propter hoc, Latin for "after this, therefore because of this," is a logical fallacy that states, "Since that event followed this one, that event must have been caused by this one." It is often shortened to simply post hoc and is also sometimes referred to as false cause,...
  
  (false cause, coincidental correlation, correlation not causation): X happened then Y happened; therefore X caused Y
• Proof by verbosity (argumentum verbosium, proof by intimidation): submission of others to an argument too complex and verbose to reasonably deal with in all its intimate details. (See also Gish Gallop and argument from authority
  Argument from authority
  Argument from authority is a special type of inductive argument which often takes the form of a statistical syllogism....
  
  .)
• Prosecutor's fallacy
  Prosecutor's fallacy
  The prosecutor's fallacy is a fallacy of statistical reasoning made in law where the context in which the accused has been brought to court is falsely assumed to be irrelevant to judging how confident a jury can be in evidence against them with a statistical measure of doubt...
  
  : a low probability of false matches does not mean a low probability of some false match being found
• Psychologist's fallacy
  Psychologist's fallacy
  The psychologist's fallacy is a fallacy that occurs when an observer presupposes the objectivity of their own perspective when analyzing a behavioral event. The fallacy was named by William James in the 19th century. It is a specific form of the "similar to me" stereotype: what is unknown about...
  
  : an observer presupposes the objectivity of his own perspective when analyzing a behavioral event
• Red herring: a speaker attempts to distract an audience by deviating from the topic at hand by introducing a separate argument which the speaker believes will be easier to speak to.
• Regression fallacy
  Regression fallacy
  The regression fallacy is an informal fallacy. It ascribes cause where none exists. The flaw is failing to account for natural fluctuations. It is frequently a special kind of the post hoc fallacy.-Explanation:...
  
  : ascribes cause where none exists. The flaw is failing to account for natural fluctuations. It is frequently a special kind of the post hoc fallacy.
• Reification
  Reification (fallacy)
  Reification is a fallacy of ambiguity, when an abstraction is treated as if it were a concrete, real event, or physical entity. In other words, it is the error of treating as a "real thing" something which is not a real thing, but merely an idea...
  
   (hypostatization): a fallacy of ambiguity, when an abstraction (abstract belief or hypothetical construct) is treated as if it were a concrete, real event or physical entity. In other words, it is the error of treating as a "real thing" something which is not a real thing, but merely an idea.
• Retrospective determinism
  Retrospective determinism
  Retrospective determinism is the logical fallacy that because something happened, it was therefore bound to happen; the term was coined by the French philosopher Henri Bergson. For example:This argument gives no logical grounds to conclude Caesar's assassination was the only possible outcome, or...
  
  : the argument that because some event has occurred, its occurrence must have been inevitable beforehand
• Special pleading
  Special pleading
  Special pleading is a form of spurious argumentation where a position in a dispute introduces favorable details or excludes unfavorable details by alleging a need to apply additional considerations without proper criticism of these considerations themselves. Essentially, this involves someone...
  
  : where a proponent of a position attempts to cite something as an exemption to a generally accepted rule or principle without justifying the exemption
• Straw man
  Straw man
  A straw man is a component of an argument and is an informal fallacy based on misrepresentation of an opponent's position, twisting his words or by means of [false] assumptions...
  
  : an argument based on misrepresentation of opponent's position twisting his words, or by means of [false]assumptions
• Wrong direction
  Wrong direction
  Wrong direction is a logical fallacy of causation where cause and effect are reversed. The cause is said to be the effect and vice versa.For instance, the statement:In other cases it may simply be unclear which is the cause and which is the effect...
  
  : cause and effect are reversed. The cause is said to be the effect and vice versa.

Faulty generalizations

Faulty generalization

Faulty generalization

A fallacy of defective induction reaches a conclusion from weak premises. Unlike fallacies of relevance, in fallacies of defective induction, the premises are related to the conclusions yet only weakly buttress the conclusions. A faulty generalization is thus produced...

s:

• Accident
  Accident (fallacy)
  The logical fallacy of accident is a deductive fallacy occurring in statistical syllogisms when an exception to a rule of thumb is ignored. It is one of the thirteen fallacies originally identified by Aristotle...
  
  : an exception to a generalization is ignored.
  • No true Scotsman
    No true Scotsman
    No true Scotsman is an informal logical fallacy, an ad hoc attempt to retain an unreasoned assertion. When faced with a counterexample to a universal claim, rather than denying the counterexample or rejecting the original universal claim, this fallacy modifies the subject of the assertion to...
    
    : when a generalization is made true only when a counterexample is ruled out on shaky grounds.
• Cherry picking (suppressed evidence, incomplete evidence): act of pointing at 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.
• False analogy
  False analogy
  -The Argument from Analogy:The process of analogical inference involves noting the shared properties of two or more things, and from this basis infering that they also share some further property...
  
  : an argument by analogy in which the analogy is poorly suited.
• Hasty generalization
  Hasty generalization
  Hasty generalization is a logical fallacy of faulty generalization by reaching an inductive generalization based on insufficient evidence essentially making a hasty conclusion without considering all of the variables...
  
   (fallacy of insufficient statistics, fallacy of insufficient sample, fallacy of the lonely fact, leaping to a conclusion, hasty induction, secundum quid, converse accident): basing a broad conclusion on a small sample.
• Misleading vividness
  Misleading vividness
  Misleading vividness is a term that can be applied to anecdotal evidence describing an occurrence, even if it is an exceptional occurrence, with sufficient detail to permit hasty generalizations about the occurrence...
  
  : involves describing an occurrence in vivid detail, even if it is an exceptional occurrence, to convince someone that it is a problem.
• Overwhelming exception
  Overwhelming exception
  An overwhelming exception is a logical fallacy similar to a hasty generalization. It is a generalization that is accurate, but comes with one or more qualifications which eliminate so many cases that what remains is much less impressive than the initial statement might have led one to...
  
  : an accurate generalization that comes with qualifications which eliminate so many cases that what remains is much less impressive than the initial statement might have led one to assume.
• Pathetic fallacy
  Pathetic fallacy
  The pathetic fallacy, anthropomorphic fallacy or sentimental fallacy is the treatment of inanimate objects as if they had human feelings, thought, or sensations. The pathetic fallacy is a special case of the fallacy of reification...
  
  : when an inanimate object is declared to have characteristics of animate objects.
• Thought-terminating cliché: a commonly used phrase, sometimes passing as folk wisdom, used to quell cognitive dissonance
  Cognitive dissonance
  Cognitive dissonance is a discomfort caused by holding conflicting ideas simultaneously. The theory of cognitive dissonance proposes that people have a motivational drive to reduce dissonance. They do this by changing their attitudes, beliefs, and actions. Dissonance is also reduced by justifying,...
  
  , conceal lack of thought-entertainment, move onto other topics etc. but in any case, end the debate with a cliche—not a point.

Red herring fallacies

A red herring is an argument, given in response to another argument, which is irrelevant and draws attention away from subject of argument. See also irrelevant conclusion

Ignoratio elenchi

Ignoratio elenchi is the informal fallacy of presenting an argument that may in itself be valid, but does not address the issue in question...

.

• Ad hominem
  Ad hominem
  An ad hominem , short for argumentum ad hominem, is an attempt to negate the truth of a claim by pointing out a negative characteristic or belief of the person supporting it...
  
  : attacking the arguer instead of the argument.
  • Poisoning the well
    Poisoning the well
    Poisoning the well is a rhetorical device where adverse information about a target is pre-emptively presented to an audience, with the intention of discrediting or ridiculing everything that the target person is about to say...
    
    : a type of ad hominem where adverse information about a target is presented with the intention of discrediting everything that the target person says
  • Abusive fallacy: a subtype of "ad hominem" when it turns into name-calling rather than arguing about the originally proposed argument.
• Argumentum ad baculum
  Argumentum ad baculum
  Argumentum ad baculum , also known as appeal to force, is an argument where force, coercion, or the threat of force, is given as a justification for a conclusion...
  
  (appeal to the stick, appeal to force, appeal to threat): an argument made through coercion or threats of force to support position
• Argumentum ad populum
  Argumentum ad populum
  In logic, an argumentum ad populum is a fallacious argument that concludes a proposition to be true because many or most people believe it; which alleges: "If many believe so, it is so."...
  
  (appeal to belief, appeal to the majority, appeal to the people): where a proposition is claimed to be true or good solely because many people believe it to be so
• Appeal to equality: where an assertion is deemed true or false based on an assumed pretense of equality.
• Association fallacy
  Association fallacy
  An association fallacy is an inductive informal fallacy of the type hasty generalization or red herring which asserts that qualities of one thing are inherently qualities of another, merely by an irrelevant association. The two types are sometimes referred to as guilt by association and honor by...
  
   (guilt by association): arguing that because two things share a property they are the same
• Appeal to authority: where an assertion is deemed true because of the position or authority of the person asserting it.
  • Appeal to accomplishment
    Appeal to accomplishment
    Appeal to accomplishment is a genetic fallacy wherein Person A challenges a thesis put forward by Person B which criticizes Person C a because Person B has not accomplished similar feats or accomplished as many feats as Person C or Person A....
    
    : where an assertion is deemed true or false based on the accomplishments of the proposer.
• Appeal to consequences
  Appeal to consequences
  Appeal to consequences, also known as argumentum ad consequentiam , is an argument that concludes a premise to be either true or false based on whether the premise leads to desirable or undesirable consequences...
  
   (argumentum ad consequentiam): the conclusion is supported by a premise that asserts positive or negative consequences from some course of action in an attempt to distract from the initial discussion
• Appeal to emotion
  Appeal to emotion
  Appeal to emotion is a potential fallacy which uses the manipulation of the recipient's emotions, rather than valid logic, to win an argument. The appeal to emotion fallacy uses emotions as the basis of an argument's position without factual evidence that logically supports the major ideas endorsed...
  
  : where an argument is made due to the manipulation of emotions, rather than the use of valid reasoning
  • Appeal to fear
    Appeal to fear
    An appeal to fear is a fallacy in which a person attempts to create support for an idea by using deception and propaganda in attempts to increase fear and prejudice toward a competitor. The appeal to fear is common in marketing and politics...
    
    : a specific type of appeal to emotion where an argument is made by increasing fear and prejudice towards the opposing side
  • Appeal to flattery
    Appeal to flattery
    Appeal to flattery is a fallacy in which a person uses flattery, excessive compliments, in an attempt to win support for their side....
    
    : a specific type of appeal to emotion where an argument is made due to the use of flattery to gather support.
  • Appeal to pity
    Appeal to pity
    An appeal to pity is a fallacy in which someone tries to win support for an argument or idea by exploiting his or her opponent's feelings of pity or guilt. It is a specific kind of appeal to emotion....
    
     (argumentum ad misericordiam): an argument attempts to induce pity to sway opponents
  • Appeal to ridicule
    Appeal to ridicule
    Appeal to ridicule, also called appeal to mockery, the Horse Laugh, or reductio ad ridiculum , is a logical fallacy which presents the opponent's argument in a way that appears ridiculous, often to the extent of creating a straw man of the actual argument, rather than addressing the argument itself...
    
    : an argument is made by presenting the opponent's argument in a way that makes it appear ridiculous
  • Appeal to spite
    Appeal to spite
    An appeal to spite is a fallacy in which someone attempts to win favor for an argument by exploiting existing feelings of bitterness, spite, or schadenfreude in the opposing party...
    
    : a specific type of appeal to emotion where an argument is made through exploiting people's bitterness or spite towards an opposing party
  • Wishful thinking
    Wishful thinking
    Wishful thinking 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...
    
    : a specific type of appeal to emotion where a decision is made according to what might be pleasing to imagine, rather than according to evidence or reason.
• Appeal to motive
  Appeal to motive
  Appeal to motive is a pattern of argument which consists in challenging a thesis by calling into question the motives of its proposer. It can be considered as a special case of the ad hominem circumstantial argument...
  
  : where a premise is dismissed by calling into question the motives of its proposer
• Appeal to novelty
  Appeal to novelty
  The appeal to novelty is a fallacy in which someone prematurely claims that an idea or proposal is correct or superior, exclusively because it is new and modern. In a controversy between status quo and new inventions, an appeal to novelty argument isn't in itself a valid argument...
  
   (argumentum ad novitam): where a proposal is claimed to be superior or better solely because it is new or modern.
• Appeal to poverty (argumentum ad Lazarum): supporting a conclusion because the arguer is poor (or refuting because the arguer is wealthy). (Opposite of appeal to wealth.)
• Appeal to tradition
  Appeal to tradition
  Appeal to tradition is a common fallacy in which a thesis is deemed correct on the basis that it correlates with some past or present tradition...
  
   (argumentum ad antiquitam): a conclusion supported solely because it has long been held to be true.
• Appeal to wealth (argumentum ad crumenam): supporting a conclusion because the arguer is wealthy (or refuting because the arguer is poor). (Sometimes taken together with the appeal to poverty as a general appeal to the arguer's financial situation.)
• Argument from silence
  Argument from silence
  The argument from silence is generally a conclusion based on silence of opponent, failing to give evidence. In the field of classical studies, it often refers to the deduction from the lack of references to a subject in the available writings of an author to the conclusion that he was ignorant of it...
  
   (argumentum ex silentio): a conclusion based on silence or lack of contrary evidence
• Chronological snobbery
  Chronological snobbery
  Chronological snobbery, a term coined by friends C. S. Lewis and Owen Barfield, is a logical argument describing the erroneous argument that the thinking, art, or science of an earlier time is inherently inferior when compared to that of the present...
  
  : where a thesis is deemed incorrect because it was commonly held when something else, clearly false, was also commonly held
• Genetic fallacy
  Genetic fallacy
  The genetic fallacy is a fallacy of irrelevance where a conclusion is suggested based solely on something or someone's origin rather than its current meaning or context. This overlooks any difference to be found in the present situation, typically transferring the positive or negative esteem from...
  
  : where a conclusion is suggested based solely on something or someone's origin rather than its current meaning or context.
• Judgmental language
  Judgmental language
  Judgmental language is a subset of red herring fallacies. It employs insultive, compromising or pejorative language to influence the recipient's judgment.-Examples:This argument combines judgmental language also with Non sequitur and appeal to authority....
  
  : insulting or pejorative language to influence the recipient's judgment
• Naturalistic fallacy
  Naturalistic fallacy
  The naturalistic fallacy is often claimed to be a formal fallacy. It was described and named by British philosopher G. E. Moore in his 1903 book Principia Ethica...
  
   (is–ought fallacy, naturalistic fallacy): claims about what ought to be on the basis of statements about what is.
• Reductio ad Hitlerum
  Reductio ad Hitlerum
  Reductio ad Hitlerum, also argumentum ad Hitlerum, is an ad hominem or ad misericordiam argument whereby an opponent's view is compared to a view that would be held by Adolf Hitler or the Nazi Party...
  
  (playing the Nazi card): comparing an opponent or their argument to Hitler or Nazism in an attempt to associate a position with one that is universally reviled (See also: Godwin's law
  Godwin's Law
  Godwin's law is a humorous observation made by Mike Godwin in 1990 that has become an Internet adage...
  
  )
• Straw man
  Straw man
  A straw man is a component of an argument and is an informal fallacy based on misrepresentation of an opponent's position, twisting his words or by means of [false] assumptions...
  
  : an argument based on misrepresentation of an opponent's position
• Texas sharpshooter fallacy
  Texas sharpshooter fallacy
  The Texas sharpshooter fallacy is a logical fallacy in which pieces of information that have no relationship to one another are called out for their similarities, and that similarity is used for claiming the existence of a pattern. This fallacy is the philosophical/rhetorical application of the...
  
  : improperly asserting a cause to explain a cluster of data
• Tu quoque
  Tu quoque
  Tu quoque , or the appeal to hypocrisy, is a kind of logical fallacy. It is a Latin term for "you, too" or "you, also". A tu quoque argument attempts to discredit the opponent's position by asserting his failure to act consistently in accordance with that position; it attempts to show that a...
  
  ("you too", appeal to hypocrisy): the argument states that a certain position is false or wrong and/or should be disregarded because its proponent fails to act consistently in accordance with that position
• Two wrongs make a right
  Two wrongs make a right
  Two wrongs make a right is an English phrases and a logical fallacy that occurs when it is assumed that if one wrong is committed, another wrong will cancel it out.*Speaker A: You shouldn't embezzle from your employer. It's against the law....
  
  : occurs when it is assumed that if one wrong is committed, another wrong will cancel it out.

Conditional or questionable fallacies

• Black swan blindness
  Black swan blindness
  Black Swan Blindness is a concept developed by Bent Flyvbjerg and Alexander Budzier at Saïd Business School, University of Oxford. The concept of Black Swan Blindness explains how decision-makers are commonly surprised by out-of-control events, which often costs them their jobs and even their...
  
  : the argument that ignores low probability, high impact events, thus down playing the role of chance and under representing known risks

• Broken window fallacy: an argument which disregards lost opportunity costs (typically non-obvious, difficult to determine or otherwise hidden) associated with destroying property of others, or other ways of externalizing costs onto others. For example, an argument that states breaking a window generates income for a window fitter, but disregards the fact that the money spent on the new window cannot now be spent on new shoes.
• Definist fallacy
  Definist fallacy
  The definist fallacy can refer to three logical fallacies related to how terms are defined in an argument. The first, coined by William Frankena in 1939, involves the definition of one property in terms of another. The second fallacy refers to the insisted use of a persuasive definition in an...
  
  : involves the confusion between two notions by defining one in terms of the other.
• Naturalistic fallacy
  Naturalistic fallacy
  The naturalistic fallacy is often claimed to be a formal fallacy. It was described and named by British philosopher G. E. Moore in his 1903 book Principia Ethica...
  
  : attempts to prove a claim about ethics by appealing to a definition of the term "good" in terms of either one or more claims about natural properties (sometimes also taken to mean the appeal to nature
  Appeal to nature
  An appeal to nature is a type of argument that depends on an understanding of nature as a source of intelligibility for its claims, and which relies on that understanding for its outcome...
  
  )
• Slippery slope
  Slippery slope
  In debate or rhetoric, a slippery slope is a classic form of argument, arguably an informal fallacy...
  
   (thin edge of the wedge, camel's nose
  Camel's nose
  The camel's nose is a metaphor for a situation where permitting some small undesirable situation will allow gradual and unavoidable worsening. A typical usage is this, from U.S. Senator Barry Goldwater in 1958:...
  
  ): asserting that a relatively small first step inevitably leads to a chain of related events culminating in some significant impact

See also

• List of common misconceptions
• List of cognitive biases
• List of memory biases
• List of misquotations
• List of topics related to public relations and propaganda
• Sophistical Refutations, in which Aristotle presented thirteen fallacies
• Straight and Crooked Thinking
  Straight and Crooked Thinking
  Straight and Crooked Thinking, first published in 1930 and revised in 1953, is a book by Robert H. Thouless which describes, assesses and critically analyses flaws in reasoning and argument. Thouless describes it as a practical manual, rather than a theoretical one.-Synopsis:*No. 3. proof by...
  
  (book)

Further reading

The following is a sample of books for further reading, selected for a combination of content, ease of access via the internet, and to provide an indication of published sources that interested readers may review. The titles of some books are self-explanatory. Good books on critical thinking commonly contain sections on fallacies, and some may be listed below.

External links

• LogicalFallacies.info
• Logical Fallacies, Literacy Education Online
• The Taxonomy of Logical Fallacies, FallacyFiles.org
• An Informal Fallacy Primer
• The Skeptic's Field Guide: Fallacy List
• Stephen's Guide to the Logical Fallacies (mirror)